- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (kejonn @ Mar. 28 2008,12:25) Why? I think attitudes such as this just show that you have something to fear from an atheist — or someone like me who feels the Abrahamic view of God is flawed. If your faith is strong, then you should have nothing to fear from an atheist or someone who sees God differently. Your faith, and the spirit of God you say you have, should be able to allow you to answer the questions that such people pose with confidence. Instead, too many just want to get angry because — perhaps — they know they don't have the answers and it is better to go after the person than address the issues. 
Quote (Samuel @ Mar. 28 2008,10:13) We've already been through this dude. I Believe in GOD.
And you can not convince me of anything else.
So please stop trying.
Well if you insist on saying what you did about Darwin I do feel that it is at least just that he be represented in his absence. I am not going to try to tell you what to believe. I resent others doing that to me, however on matters of fact where you can be right or wrong I hope I have I convinced you that the simplistic creationist lies put about by US fundamentalists just don't add up when exposed to evidence.
Of course we all have the right to our beliefs. I think ignorance of science is no excuse to mislead people.Stuart
Quote (kejonn @ Mar. 28 2008,13:00) Well either you agree with me or that is nervous laughter 
.
I think seek and you will find has just demonstrated perfectly the point you were making.Stuart
No I really wish their eyes would be opened to the truth.
Darwin…Yeah hes a human and capable of making mis-assumptions. Just like Einstein made the “Greatest” mistake of his life.
Science is still something that is not “Fact” yet …they are learning new things every second at this point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOiBbxnU9jw&feature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vu17CFG6g4&feature=related
Even if we were to say that Darwin is or was right…which I have no reason to believe that he was or is. And, if this whole idea of evolution was indeed the fact the way life came about…there is still no reason why that was not the way GOD created ever thing….Furthermore, we would have had to had started out with something…like say a …single celled organism.
Which begs the question…”How did it get started?” did it just appear? Did it fly here on a rock from space? If so, where did it come from? ….WHO or WHAT made it?
See there is one big design flaw in your whole “I don't believe in GOD theory” You are a creature that lives in and is part of a dimension called “Time”. The really Ironic thing about time is that it had to “Start” somewhere.
Everything in our minds in any belief and study always has to have these questions in our minds answered. Who? What? When? Where? How?
If we can't answer this questions then it don't make sense.
At best in a “I don't believe in GOD” belief your saying that life, the universe, and every thing that we know or anything else knows has absolutely no purpose what so ever…That its all just one big paradox of aimless peat and repeat …that continues on for eternity. That makes about as much sense as peanut butter and steak sauce mixed together.
Which means even thinking about discussing it is absolutely pointless.
…
Man it just does not compute, it makes “0” sense. With out a creator (GOD) there is no reason for anything to be anything.
We just might as well not even exist. If this were true…which I will never be convinced that it is….Its false, its a lie from the pits of hell…Satan is still a lier and I will not be deceived.
Hi Samuel (Part 1)
Quote Darwin…Yeah hes a human and capable of making mis-assumptions. Just like Einstein made the “Greatest” mistake of his life. Science is still something that is not “Fact” yet …they are learning new things every second at this point.
Darwin was a pretty astonishing person in many ways. He did not have the evidence we have now, for example he did not know about the way DNA codes genetic information and how it can be mutated by the environment, yet he still got it right. I define ‘fact’ as something that is so well demonstrated that it would be perverse to deny it. Evolution is fact. There is no other explanation for the fossil record and comparative DNA data. Creationists cannot explain the fossil record. Yes we are learning new things, faster than ever, by the same means that Darwin discovered natural selection, but not a single piece of that new knowledge contradicts natural selection.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOiBbxnU9jw&feature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vu17CFG6g4&feature=related
The first video is a pretty good short summary of Darwin, except the last bit where Jonathan Wells tells us that increasing numbers of scientists and scholars are questioning natural selection as the full explanation. This statement is essentially a lie.
The second video makes one point: life is so much more complex than Darwin imagined, and we think some of the trickier bits were designed. Note carefully that these gentlemen all accept evolution by natural selection, but they are inserting god at the point where they can no longer control their incredulity. They fail to say why natural selection cannot produce a motorised flagellum. Michael Behe is wrong about there being no Darwininan explanation for the flagellum: the motor is derived from a protein transport system that has adapted to a new job of flagellar motion.
Wikipedia on Intelligent Design:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design#Irreducible_complexity
The guts of their argument in detail:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity
The real agenda:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy
You could entitle this bit “What Behe didn’t know about flagella”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_flagellaStuart
Hi again Samuel (Part 2)
Quote Even if we were to say that Darwin is or was right…which I have no reason to believe that he was or is.
you have plenty of reason to believe he is and none to disbelieve it, except a literal interpretation of Genesis. That is the only motive anyone has ever had for attempting to discredit Darwin. There is no scientific argument against Darwin, these are philosophical arguments dressed up as science. See the Wedge Strategy above.Quote And, if this whole idea of evolution was indeed the fact the way life came about…there is still no reason why that was not the way GOD created ever thing….
There are reasons why it is not the Judeo-christian god.Quote Furthermore, we would have had to had started out with something…like say a …single celled organism.
You need to start with a self-replicating molecule. As abiogenesis is only known to have happened once, over 3.7 billion years ago, it is understandably poorly understood and we may never know the exact detail. There are some pretty intelligent and plausible ideas for it though. You don’t see the same process happening today because there are bacteria everywhere any complex molecule like that would become something’s lunch pretty quickly.Quote Which begs the question…”How did it get started?” did it just appear? Did it fly here on a rock from space? If so, where did it come from? ….WHO or WHAT made it?
It certainly does ask that question. The best explanation does not finish with a WHO, because the who will presumably be an intelligent thing that itself will need explaining. We should not be satisfied until everything is explained in terms of WHAT and HOW.Quote See there is one big design flaw in your whole “I don't believe in GOD theory” You are a creature that lives in and is part of a dimension called “Time”. The really Ironic thing about time is that it had to “Start” somewhere.
Sure. Time as we measure it did not exist until the universe began. There were no dimensions until the big bang. To ask what came before the big bang is to ask a question that does not have an answer. You may put god in that gap, but that god of the gaps will die once we do work out what ‘went before’. Just to really emphasise how weird time is, consider that the universe is a different age depending on where you are in it.Quote Everything in our minds in any belief and study always has to have these questions in our minds answered. Who? What? When? Where? How? If we can't answer this questions then it don't make sense.
I always like to go further than Who.
When is a big question when discussing origins.
Where is almost as big a question.
How is the Rolls-Royce question. This is the one creationists have no clue about at all. They just repeat ‘who’ when they can’t say how.Stuart
Hi Samuel (Part 3)
Quote At best in a “I don't believe in GOD” belief your saying that life, the universe, and every thing that we know or anything else knows has absolutely no purpose what so ever…That its all just one big paradox of aimless peat and repeat …that continues on for eternity. That makes about as much sense as peanut butter and steak sauce mixed together. Which means even thinking about discussing it is absolutely pointless.
By the nature of your occurrence by natural selection, your life has no purpose imposed on it from the outside. The meaning of life is the meaning you achieve by living it.Quote Man it just does not compute, it makes “0” sense. With out a creator (GOD) there is no reason for anything to be anything. We just might as well not even exist. If this were true…which I will never be convinced that it is….Its false, its a lie from the pits of hell…Satan is still a lier and I will not be deceived.
There is a tendency for people to take a negative view if they come to the realisation that there is no god and therefore there is no ‘ultimate parent’ up there looking out for them. The answer is to be positive and involved and make our own lives have the meaning we give them, for the short but precious time we each have.Stuart
You are a pretty tough cookie.
I can see that your heart is very hard about the whole deal.I do have a Question for you though.
What shall you do if evolution is flat out, hands-down proven to be wrong?
Now…don't go saying that there is no possible way that is ever going to happen, because there is no way your wrong…because then I'm just going to quit talking to you again.I think a truthful answer to that question would involve a reaction similar to a creationist…In your own words as you like to call it.
In any event …that you are right and I'm wrong…I still haven't lost anything, and I have no explaining to do except maybe saying that “Hey you know what…I'm sorry man”
In the event that I'm proven to be right by my Father…you are going to have a lot of explaining to do …because I've tried to help you see the truth. And…it will then be to late for “I'm sorries”
Now I have a personal question if I may?
Do you have a problem with authority or something? Maybe a little OCD, or ADHD? You seem like someone to me that might not get along to well with your boss at work or something. Maybe your girlfriend in a relationship gets on your nerves? Maybe that has something to do with the fact that you don't want to accept the fact that GOD made you…because then he would automatically have authority over you?In the class Real Colors that I took …you seem to be a Green. You have to have all the “Facts” or you can't make a decision. If there is not enough “Data” then it don't make sense to you.
Have you ever thought of “Thinking Outside the Box?”
I'm a Blue…I'm a pretty “Emo” type person. Maybe thats why its easy for me to accept the fact that Christ died for me and …well I just get emo on stuff. I have a soft heart. However, I'm a why kind of person too. I like to know why have have to work an hour over at work?…why the truck won't start? Why my girlfriend is mad at me?(which she will never tell you so its a waste of time to ask). Why? why? why?
Well…just because some scientist said that a molecule is or was so many billions of years old don't mean that it is. Adam and Eve were not newborns when GOD made them. Thus is the way with the Rocks and Planets, Suns, Moons, and Such …Atoms, Molecules…etc. They were probably already as “Old” as they needed to be at the time of creation for things to work.
I completely disagree with this Darwin guy. And according to my belief he is so far from right that its funny.
Ignorance is bliss!
Darwin himself acknowledged that the fossil record failed to support his conclusions.
“Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me.” (The Origin of Species, 1859, Masterpieces of Science edition, 1958, pp. 136-137).
He was right.
IMO they are all wrong.
They huff around proclaiming they have the evidence to prove there is not GOD.
In the end they all end up admitting that their “So-Called” evidence is not at all what it was “Cracked-Up” to be.
And people like Einstein don't even say “Hey you know what…I'm sorry” No…they just keep right on going.
If you prove me wrong I will say I'm sorry …cause thats what kind of person I am…I'm not perfect…but I do care.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Mar. 30 2008,18:29) Darwin himself acknowledged that the fossil record failed to support his conclusions. “Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me.” (The Origin of Species, 1859, Masterpieces of Science edition, 1958, pp. 136-137).
He was right.
And if he said the same thing now he would be wrong. There are many well-resolved series of intermediates forming long lines of evolutionary change, discovered since Darwin's time.Stuart
Hi Stu,
Darwin must be sick of everyone standing on his shoulders and then telling the world he was a liar.Hi Samuel (Part 1)
Quote You are a pretty tough cookie. I can see that your heart is very hard about the whole deal.
Actually I am quite prepared to be critical in both directions. Point out how evolution by natural selection is wrong and I will listen. So far it has been more than able to answer the hardest questioning I can muster. It is about having high standards for acceptance. I’m afraid god-belief failed those questions pretty early on in my life.Quote I do have a Question for you though. What shall you do if evolution is flat out, hands-down proven to be wrong?
I will be amazed by the brilliant science that has overturned the brilliance of Darwin. I will join the queue to applaud the awarding of the Nobel Prize. I will be fascinated to see life from the perspective of a far more illuminating model.Quote Now…don't go saying that there is no possible way that is ever going to happen, because there is no way your wrong…because then I'm just going to quit talking to you again.
No not at all. Natural selection is falsifiable, everyone is quite prepared for someone to come along and use empirical evidence to demonstrate it is wrong. However no one has even made a dent in it in the last 149 years. In that time the physics and chemistry textbooks have been radically rewritten. All the new evidence has just made the case for evolution by natural selection a lot stronger, and Darwin’s achievement even more spectacular, although to be fair Alfred Wallace and others were doing similar work at the same time.Quote I think a truthful answer to that question would involve a reaction similar to a creationist…In your own words as you like to call it. In any event …that you are right and I'm wrong…I still haven't lost anything, and I have no explaining to do except maybe saying that “Hey you know what…I'm sorry man”
You should not be sorry. You should demand the highest standards of probity for anything. Like all science it could be wrong. Actually it is good enough to be actively useful. Natural selection is for a biologist what a pocket calculator is for an accountant. More than that, evolution is the uniting principle in biology; biology makes no sense without Darwin. I can’t imagine what an alternative would be like, that doesn’t mean there isn’t one, but some of the best brains on the planet have also failed to imagine how Darwin could be wrong, despite trying.Stuart
Hi Samuel (Part 2)
Quote In the event that I'm proven to be right by my Father…you are going to have a lot of explaining to do …because I've tried to help you see the truth. And…it will then be to late for “I'm sorries”
I think it is never too late in life to acknowledge that others were right and I was wrong. We are all wrong about something. My issues with god are not to do with evolution anyway. It is obvious that creationists lie. My beef is the violent and unjust OT view of god and he would answer to me if I had the strength to demand it. I don’t think any of that is likely to happen in any case.Quote Now I have a personal question if I may? Do you have a problem with authority or something? Maybe a little OCD, or ADHD? You seem like someone to me that might not get along to well with your boss at work or something. Maybe your girlfriend in a relationship gets on your nerves? Maybe that has something to do with the fact that you don't want to accept the fact that GOD made you…because then he would automatically have authority over you?
As far as I am aware I am not OCD or ADHD or ADD. It is not obvious to me that I have particular objections to authority, more than the average person. Through your eyes perhaps it looks that way, but remember I don’t actually believe there is a god of which you write at all. When I write the word god I am being hypothetical for the purposes of discussion. Thank you for asking though!
[quoteIn the class Real Colors that I took …you seem to be a Green. You have to have all the “Facts” or you can't make a decision. If there is not enough “Data” then it don't make sense to you. Have you ever thought of “Thinking Outside the Box?”[/quote]
I reserve a tiny chink of possibility that there is a god of the kind you mention. It would be dishonest to say categorically that there is no such thing, however I live as if there isn’t because that is the only conclusion that you can make based on evidence. Now, which of us is more able to ‘think outside the box’?Quote I'm a Blue…I'm a pretty “Emo” type person. Maybe thats why its easy for me to accept the fact that Christ died for me and …well I just get emo on stuff. I have a soft heart. However, I'm a why kind of person too. I like to know why have have to work an hour over at work?…why the truck won't start? Why my girlfriend is mad at me?(which she will never tell you so its a waste of time to ask). Why? why? why?
What course paints you different colours?Quote Well…just because some scientist said that a molecule is or was so many billions of years old don't mean that it is. Adam and Eve were not newborns when GOD made them. Thus is the way with the Rocks and Planets, Suns, Moons, and Such …Atoms, Molecules…etc. They were probably already as “Old” as they needed to be at the time of creation for things to work.
So Adam did not have a navel. We are all different from him. My view is different, I think all humans have had navels.I completely disagree with this Darwin guy. And according to my belief he is so far from right that its funny.
Ignorance is bliss!
It is worthwhile finding out exactly what it is you disagree with. I have found that with the bible. Unfortunately it does confirm my worst prejudices, but at least I know more about it.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 30 2008,19:34) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Mar. 30 2008,18:29) Darwin himself acknowledged that the fossil record failed to support his conclusions. “Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me.” (The Origin of Species, 1859, Masterpieces of Science edition, 1958, pp. 136-137).
He was right.
And if he said the same thing now he would be wrong. There are many well-resolved series of intermediates forming long lines of evolutionary change, discovered since Darwin's time.Stuart
Can you cite a single fossil find of an intermediary species between, say, a bird and a reptile?Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 30 2008,20:04) Hi Stu,
Darwin must be sick of everyone standing on his shoulders and then telling the world he was a liar.
Who said he was a liar?Stuart
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Mar. 30 2008,20:18) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 30 2008,19:34) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Mar. 30 2008,18:29) Darwin himself acknowledged that the fossil record failed to support his conclusions. “Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me.” (The Origin of Species, 1859, Masterpieces of Science edition, 1958, pp. 136-137).
He was right.
And if he said the same thing now he would be wrong. There are many well-resolved series of intermediates forming long lines of evolutionary change, discovered since Darwin's time.Stuart
Can you cite a single fossil find of an intermediary species between, say, a bird and a reptile?
Archaeopteryx. A bird with avian feathers and dinosaur teeth.Is that what you expected me to write?
Stuart
Quote (Samuel @ Mar. 30 2008,18:39) They huff around proclaiming they have the evidence to prove there is not GOD.
There is no evidence that “proves there is no god”. Anyone saying such a thing is being dishonest.There is no evidence that proves that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not the creator, either.
Stuart
Archaeopteryx was a bird. It possessed the full anatomy and brain structure needed for flight. Its teeth were grasping teeth, and it was not the only fossilised bird species discovered to have them either. It's feathers have been found to be complete feathers, like modern birds. Got anything more compelling?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
