Darwin's theory

floggg · 26-10-2014 09:31PM

J C wrote: »

I never came across this before ...

Is this some kind of skill that some Evolutionists have evolved, so to speak???:D

... or is just the way they have always talked to each other?:)

Oh you can see my posts.

So I imagine I'll be getting a reply to all the substantive queries I raised now then.

5uspect · 26-10-2014 09:34PM

mickrock wrote: »

Ok, evolution is a creative and intelligent process then.

Thanks for clearing it up.

Read an undergrad biology textbook.

Saganist · 26-10-2014 09:35PM

This video sounds like JC in this thread.. :pac:

housetypeb · 26-10-2014 09:39PM

5uspect wrote: »

Read an undergrad biology textbook.

Why would they bother? They've got a perfectly good book written by sheep herders that explains everything.

Squeedily Spooch · 26-10-2014 09:40PM

J C wrote: »

By calling the use of smileys 'trolling' ... you are trivializing a very nasty and serious form of on-line bullying ... which real trolling is.

It's like accusing somebody who smiles at you of rape!!!:(

More misrepresenting. You're actually pathetic. Reported, and will report every passive aggressive troll post you make from here on out.

Squeedily Spooch · 26-10-2014 09:43PM

floggg wrote: »

No, that didn't in any way provide an answer or evidence.

Just because you dress up your belief as an absolute truth, doesn't mean it is one.

Please point to any EVIDENCE (other than the bible) that god is an uncreated creator. Something objectively verifiable.

I look forward to it.

It doesn't exist, without the bible ID and Creationism fall apart. So they're not real science. Like was mentioned earlier it'd be like gravity needing a myth behind it.

mickrock · 26-10-2014 09:44PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

No. Just because something isn't a blind random process doesn't mean there's a big bearded fella in the sky directing it all behind the scenes.

Why do you have to keep bringing religion into it?

The standard view is that evolution is blind and dumb(unintelligent), which you seem to disagree with in one post and agree with in another.

SaveOurLyric · 26-10-2014 09:59PM

J C wrote: »

... only Atheists (and anybody else) who starts using Stalinist language by calling Christians 'deluded and insane'.

I dont think there can be any doubt about Christians being deluded. Any medical or psychological assessment would surely conclude nothing else. Reason is simply abandoned, a fairy tale believed and taken as a template for living, and standard unqueationable areas of science denied by those in thrall to the fiction. Debate with such faulty minds in their warped frame of reference is pointless. Can any one point in the direction of serious research into the minds of the religious and how the lose the ability to reason on selected topics ?

Defender OF Faith · 26-10-2014 10:05PM

Chunners wrote: »

Personally I like how you took my previous post, threw in a few references to your delusion and then claimed it as your own

I didn't even read nor see your previous post, but now that you pointed it out and unless you are blind it's no different then my argument for god existence.
You believe that a different space existed before ours that had its own laws which are impossible for us to understand because it's outside our universe and apparently in that universe something can be created out of nothing while I believe that God is that space and him being outside our space would be impossible for us to understand.
That would make you deluded aswell my friend.

floggg wrote: »

No, that didn't in any way provide an answer or evidence.

Just because you dress up your belief as an absolute truth, doesn't mean it is one.

Please point to any EVIDENCE (other than the bible) that god is an uncreated creator. Something objectively verifiable.

I look forward to it.

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

None of that proves god exists though.

Do you even read your own posts?

I think I should of asked this question a while ago, exactly what kind of proof are you looking for?
What I presented is a logical and rational proof, if your looking for a scientific/materialistic proof for god existence then you might have to wait for a very long time if not forever,Science is not even close in understanding the universe and the more complex functions of the human body itself, let alone be able to prove the existence of an entity outside our own very universe.

dr.fuzzenstein · 26-10-2014 10:08PM

Loud noises!!!!

Chunners · 26-10-2014 10:10PM

mickrock wrote: »

Why do you have to keep bringing religion into it?

The standard view is that evolution is blind and dumb(unintelligent), which you seem to disagree with in one post and agree with in another.

No evolution is neither intelligent nor unintelligent, it has no brain, it is nothing more than a process of trail and error. Successful trials continue on, unsuccessful trials die out. What you are doing is anthropomorphizing evolution and giving it human traits like intelligence, forethought, foresight, existing knowledge of the final product when all it is starting with is the basic building blocks. You are viewing it as an architect in field full of bricks and cement that already has the blue prints for the final building which is just silly reasoning really.

Brian Shanahan · 26-10-2014 10:10PM

Uncle Ruckus wrote: »

Science may not have all the answers yet but it sure has a pretty damn good track record. Far better than a talking snake and a magic apple.

It has been accurately said of science, that it is not exactly a mechanism for finding out what is right, but eliminating what is wrong.

Science eliminated creationism, and it's modern successor id, about 150 years ago. What was found to be wrong back then is still wrong now.

mickrock · 26-10-2014 10:19PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

What is the source of this intelligence if it isn't some diety? I've yet to see anyone make the argument that evolution is guided by an intelligence without attributing said intelligence to a god.

The source of the intelligence is a different question altogether.

The inference that intelligence is responsible for the creation and evolution of life has not been refuted.

Abiogenesis and blind, dumb Darwinian evolution are just creation stories for those who recoil from the idea that intelligence might be involved.

Defender OF Faith · 26-10-2014 10:21PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Again, no, you didn't present proof of any kind. You have just said 'I don't understand it so it must be god'. That is neither logical or rational. Possible, perhaps, since it hasn't been proven otherwise yet, but certainly not logical or rational.

I dare you to point out in all my posts and quote it, were I have said that or used this as a build up of my argument because I never did & can you please at least show me how it's not logical and rational? since everything I said was backed with logic and rational.
I think your simply in denial that a logical argument exist for the presence of god because accepting god will take you out of your comfort zone of simply not thinking about heaven,hell,retribution and resurrection because god does not exist.

Saganist · 26-10-2014 10:26PM

mickrock wrote: »

The inference that intelligence is responsible for the creation and evolution of life has not been refuted.

Ok. Lets take baby steps.

The bolded bit above.

Why would it be refuted ? It would never get to the stage in science where we find something we don't totally understand and then infer "Sure it must be God".

Just like if I was trying to prove I had a pet fairy.

What would you do if I told you I had a pet fairy and she is the one true God ?

How can you refute what I say ?

Chunners · 26-10-2014 10:30PM

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

I didn't even read nor see your previous post, but now that you pointed it out and unless you are blind it's no different then my argument for god existence.
You believe that a different space existed before ours that had its own laws which are impossible for us to understand because it's outside our universe and apparently in that universe something can be created out of nothing while I believe that God is that space and him being outside our space would be impossible for us to understand.
That would make you deluded aswell my friend.

Actually it is different, see if you knew anything about time and space you would know that God could not exist outside time and space because any movement from a point A to a point B is in itself a movement in time and to move from a point A to a point B would be indicative of a movement in a 3 dimensional space (X, Y, Z axis). See I called it "Space" because I (quite rightly it seems) didn't think any of you could get your head around the concept of absolutely nothing and Quantum physics allows for small random energy events (that could lead to a big bang) to occur in absolute nothingness since there is no transfer of nano particles from a point A to a point B yet to cause a time event to occur.

mickrock · 26-10-2014 10:31PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I like how you criticize me for bringing religion into things when you're very clearly doing just that while trying desperately to avoid actually saying it.

I'm not religious at all.

Logic and reason have led me to my conclusions about intelligence in nature.

Saganist · 26-10-2014 10:35PM

mickrock wrote: »

I'm not religious at all.

Logic and reason have led me to my conclusions about intelligence in nature.

Explain please.

Defender OF Faith · 26-10-2014 10:43PM

Chunners wrote: »

Actually it is different, see if you knew anything about time and space you would know that God could not exist outside time and space because any movement from a point A to a point B is in itself a movement in time and to move from a point A to a point B would be indicative of a movement in a 3 dimensional space (X, Y, Z axis). See I called it "Space" because I (quite rightly it seems) didn't think any of you could get your head around the concept of absolutely nothing and Quantum physics allows for small random energy events (that could lead to a big bang) to occur in absolute nothingness since there is no transfer of nano particles from a point A to a point B yet to cause a time event to occur.

Thats if we go by your argument/explanation and say that a "space" existed before ours, while I have said that this space is God meaning; there is no space before our space and only god was their, and since both of these arguments relate to matter/entity outside our universe it's impossible for us to understand.

Saganist · 26-10-2014 10:46PM

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Thats if we go by your argument/explanation and say that a "space" existed before ours, while I have said that this space is God meaning; there is no space before our space and only god was their, and since both of these arguments relate to matter/entity outside our universe it's impossible for us to understand.

The bolded bit.

If we said that when we discovered gravity where would we be now ?

Defender OF Faith · 26-10-2014 10:53PM

Saganist wrote: »

The bolded bit.

If we said that when we discovered gravity where would we be now ?

Forgive me but I don't seem to fully understand what your saying if you meant that if we discovered gravity we simply sat down and didn't bother delving deeper into it because it would be impossible for us to understand, then this doesnt contradict what I said because gravity is in our universe and is possible to understand.

Chunners · 26-10-2014 10:54PM

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Thats if we go by your argument/explanation and say that a "space" existed before ours, while I have said that this space is God meaning; there is no space before our space and only god was their, and since both of these arguments relate to matter/entity outside our universe it's impossible for us to understand.

No yet again, my argument says quite the opposite, my argument states quite clearly that there is absolutely no matter outside our universe and until our universe came into existence there was no time either so your "god" could not have existed. It may be impossible for you to understand what you claim to be true but trust me I have a full grasp of what I claim to be true so please refrain for lumping me into the "it is impossible for us to understand" group. Let me be quite clear on this, I never once said "I don't believe in god" , I know god doesn't exist, there is no doubt in my head that it is nothing more than a delusion of people who either can't, or are too afraid to, let their minds realize just how insignificant and small we really are.

Saganist · 26-10-2014 10:54PM

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Forgive me but I don't seem to fully understand what your saying if you meant that if we discovered gravity we simply sat down and didn't bother delving deeper into it because it would be impossible for us to understand, then this doesnt contradict what I said because gravity is in our universe and is possible to understand.

As is evolution... :pac:

floggg · 26-10-2014 10:55PM

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

I didn't even read nor see your previous post, but now that you pointed it out and unless you are blind it's no different then my argument for god existence.
You believe that a different space existed before ours that had its own laws which are impossible for us to understand because it's outside our universe and apparently in that universe something can be created out of nothing while I believe that God is that space and him being outside our space would be impossible for us to understand.
That would make you deluded aswell my friend.

I think I should of asked this question a while ago, exactly what kind of proof are you looking for?
What I presented is a logical and rational proof, if your looking for a scientific/materialistic proof for god existence then you might have to wait for a very long time if not forever,Science is not even close in understanding the universe and the more complex functions of the human body itself, let alone be able to prove the existence of an entity outside our own very universe.

You didn't present any proof.

You presented a theory or belief on how God might be an uncreated creator but that's just it.

As you say yourself, there is no proof for it. The best you have offered is an explanation of how you think it might be, but no more. And certainly nothing verifiable or which must be taken as any form of logical conclusion.

You have only presented reasons why you think it might be true but that is subjective and personal to you. You haven't presented any reason why it just be true or why a universe can't come into being from nothing yet god can.

So you have proved nothing nor established any logical positon.

kingchess · 26-10-2014 10:57PM

THERE is no space and time outside the universe-you can not stand outside the universe and watch it expand towards you because there is no space outside the universe for the universe to expand into

Time and Space began with the universe and that is what is expanding.

Defender OF Faith · 26-10-2014 11:04PM

Chunners wrote: »

No yet again, my argument says quite the opposite, my argument states quite clearly that there is absolutely no matter outside our universe and until our universe came into existence there was no time either so your "god" could not have existed. It may be impossible for you to understand what you claim to be true but trust me I have a full grasp of what I claim to be true so please refrain for lumping me into the "it is impossible for us to understand" group. Let me be quite clear on this, I never once said "I don't believe in god" , I know god doesn't exist, there is no doubt in my head that it is nothing more than a delusion of people who either can't, or are too afraid to, let their minds realize just how insignificant and small we really are.

You said and I quote "God could not exist outside time and space ".
To begin with and I didn't point this out earlier, the obvious flaw in this argument is your application of our laws of physics to another universe outside of ours, and again you believe that no matter existed before our universe while I believe that an entity does exist and that entity is God.
You cannot support your claim and have no logical argument for it, -that no matter existed before our universe- while I have the principle of cause & effect to support my claim with God outside our universe being the cause of it.
So it makes more sense to accept and believe something that have at least some sort of claim supporting it rather then accepting and blindly following something that have no claim and logical argument supporting it.

dr.fuzzenstein · 26-10-2014 11:13PM

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

I dare you to point out in all my posts and quote it, were I have said that or used this as a build up of my argument because I never did & can you please at least show me how it's not logical and rational? since everything I said was backed with logic and rational.
I think your simply in denial that a logical argument exist for the presence of god because accepting god will take you out of your comfort zone of simply not thinking about heaven,hell,retribution and resurrection because god does not exist.

God refuses to prove that he exist, since that would make faith pointless.
So stop trying to prove he does, or he will disappear with a poof into a little cloud of logic.
Anyways, my argument is that if there is a god, he simply drew up the plans and pushed the button, the rest follows the laws of nature, i.e. science.
So there's you science/religion divide, now stop trying to muddle the two and I mean everyone. Your making baby Jesus cry.

Chunners · 26-10-2014 11:18PM

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

You said and I quote "God could not exist outside time and space ".
To begin with and I didn't point this out earlier, the obvious flaw in this argument is your application of our laws of physics to another universe outside of ours, and again you believe that no matter existed before our universe while I believe that an entity does exist and that entity is God.
You cannot support your claim and have no logical argument for it, -that no matter existed before our universe- while I have the principle of cause & effect to support my claim with God outside our universe being the cause of it.
So it makes more sense to accept and believe something that have at least some sort of claim supporting it rather then accepting and blindly following something that have no claim and logical argument supporting it.

Sorry but you are wrong, "Cause and effect" are products of our universe's laws of physics. You can't claim some of our laws apply why others don't, it's either all or nothing. I didn't apply any of our laws to outside our universe, at least not before the creation of our universe, then the laws would change because where there was nothing there would now be something and once there is something there is movement and for movement to exist time must exist. Your own bible states that God made man in his own image (don't even get me started on the flaws in that statement btw) ergo god is shaped like man, a 3 dimensional being which, to move, would require time and space to move in thus negating any argument you have that it exists out of time or is "uncreated". Really yourself and JC should collaborate more before you make these ridiculous claims that are totally contradictory and make fools of each other.

Chunners · 26-10-2014 11:24PM

kingchess wrote: »

THERE is no space and time outside the universe-you can not stand outside the universe and watch it expand towards you because there is no space outside the universe for the universe to expand into
Time and Space began with the universe and that is what is expanding.

Not so, gravity should be causing the expansion of the universe to slow down when in actual fact it is speeding up which means one of 2 things. 1. that the conditions inside our universe are changing (one theory is "Dark gravity" is being created somehow) or 2. the conditions outside our universe are changing (kind of like bringing a balloon on a plane and taking off and the higher you go the less dense the air outside the balloon becomes so the more the balloon expands, crap analogy but for this it will suit the purpose). Dark gravity is a theory like dark matter

Defender OF Faith · 26-10-2014 11:29PM

Chunners wrote: »

Sorry but you are wrong, "Cause and effect" are products of our universe's laws of physics. You can't claim some of our laws apply why others don't, it's either all or nothing. I didn't apply any of our laws to outside our universe, at least not before the creation of our universe, then the laws would change because where there was nothing there would now be something and once there is something there is movement and for movement to exist time must exist. Your own bible states that God made man in his own image (don't even get me started on the flaws in that statement btw) ergo god is shaped like man, a 3 dimensional being which, to move, would require time and space to move in thus negating any argument you have that it exists out of time or is "uncreated". Really yourself and JC should collaborate more before you make these ridiculous claims that are totally contradictory and make fools of each other.

I don't really agree with the Bible description of god creating man in his image being a student of comparative religion I find the Quran description of God better:
"there is nothing like Him, and He is the One that hears and sees (all things)."(42/11)
"No vision can grasps him, but he grasps all vision. He is the most courteous, the well-acquainted with all things" (103/6)

Darwin's theory

Comments