Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 1027
view profile
History
EvolutionPage 41 of 64    (24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64)

A very general and actually good definition of why God...ooops this is the evolution site. We have evolved past a need for God...and all is allrite. Think so?
In very silent ways... a way of accepting, a way of knowing and a way to still the anxiousness presents freely...no dollar amount attached. Open to viewing. Parallel to the strict, scientific universe where all wonder is kicked out for being beside the point. Because every scientific discovery and implementation is what really matters. Progress. Yawn. What matters is why you can step up and be comforted in such a silent and poignant way. Its free of charge. All the rest is just busy work that pans out to a whole lot of promise followed by the eventual fallout. Who can afford the scientific marvels achieved in the medical system in the U.S.A.???? Yawn.

Relating your comment to evolution of human society, which is what it seems to be about - it's a bit hard to tell frankly - you should consider writing in whole sentences, you'd lose the ability to keep saying "That isn't what I meant", but you might gain the comprehension of the audience?
But anyway, it seems to be a negative summary of the value of organised science in regard to human evolution?

But rather than being negative, why not post wonderfully descriptive tales of the benefits of organised religion on human society?
You know, you could regale everyone with glowing references to all those wonderful societies where they don't separate religion and state, where the government is based on religious principles, where justice follows religious guidelines and is sometimes even administered by the priests and ayatollahs, where medicine is doled out sensibly following religious teachings and constraints, where education and learning is rightly curbed to avoid conflict with sacred text.

Should be easy hey? Where all the people are fine tuned to receive 'wonder' and fully appreciate the marvellousness of existence, as they bath in the splendour of their supportive and highly equipped fully functional religious society, presumably where no one goes without anything, in the interest of fairness, and everyones needs are taken care of in a responsible and sustainable way.

Go on, describe that place. It'll make a change from your continual whining about what a distraction and waste of time science is.

Don't forget to name these wonderful places too, so anyone interested can look them up and marvel (inadequately) at the wonderful way organised religion creates little heaven societies on earth for all it's faithful believers, in contrast to the bad job science has done in contributing to the evolution of human society and potential.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 1028
Evolution
Posted: 4/21/2011 5:51:59 AM

My personal outlook on God is that he does exist, but does not interfere with humans, as we are allowed to make our own mistakes, so insomuch as I don't think that he is playing an active role on earth at this time, it would be impossible to fashion a "test" for Him.

No it's not. If you believe god is responsible for having anything to do with the universe, ever, you ought to be able to say what it is. The only god that could never leave any traces of his actions is one whose role keeps changing to stay ahead of the scientific knowledge about earlier and earlier times in the universe until you're left with a god who did nothing. That's not much of a god.
 Quello79
Joined: 7/18/2010
Msg: 1029
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/21/2011 8:01:40 AM
Fossils aren't evidence against Genesis, they actually support it. They are the result of the global flood. Without the flood, we wouldn't find miillions of fossils all over the world. They require a sudden burial with water and earth to form. Some fossils are of fish eating other fish, others giving birth. Fossils are not formed from a natural death and slow burial.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 1030
Evolution
Posted: 4/21/2011 8:43:31 AM
Does (a ) G0d need to be impressive

I suppose god can whatever you want god to be, but if you really belive in some idea of god, you should at least say what you mean by that so your idea of god isn't confused with someone else's idea of god. If you don't want to do that, then it's fair for me to to assume whatever I want.

Fossils are not formed from a natural death and slow burial.

You should write that up, publish it in an academic journal and get back to us when it's published so we can all witness the shake up of paleontology as the revolution unfolds. I'm sure no one has ever thought of that before...
 Quello79
Joined: 7/18/2010
Msg: 1031
view profile
History
Evolution
Posted: 4/21/2011 9:07:36 AM

Fossils are not formed from a natural death and slow burial.

You should write that up, publish it in an academic journal and get back to us when it's published so we can all witness the shake up of paleontology as the revolution unfolds. I'm sure no one has ever thought of that before...


It's already common knowledge in the scientific community. Look it up yourself.
http://www.discoveringfossils.co.uk/whatisafossil.htm
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 1032
Evolution
Posted: 4/21/2011 1:46:49 PM

It's already common knowledge in the scientific community. Look it up yourself.

Really? Do you have a link to a scholarly article that cites the book of genesis?
 Quello79
Joined: 7/18/2010
Msg: 1033
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/21/2011 3:38:15 PM
Er, because humans have the intelligence and means to get to higher ground when fleeing from a flood.
There's no apparent dinosaurs left because we killed them off. They were a menace to society and like all pests have to be driven off to secure settlements. And the remainds we useful, the skins and bones used for shelters and clothing and blood used in medicines. Go back in time and ask St George of the many other dragon (now called dinosaurs) slayers.
Personally, I don't think dinosaurs are entirely extinct. There's the mokele-mbembe in the Congo swamps, the Loch Ness "Monster" (of which there are over 11,000 sightings), Champ in USA and various other sea creatures that resemble the dinosaurs we read about. In order to know they are extince, we's have to be everywhere at the same time. The congo swamps are 95% unexplored by the western world and the natives claim that sauropods live there and have killed men. There's also reports of pterodactyls in Kenya.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 1034
view profile
History
Evolution
Posted: 4/21/2011 6:14:49 PM
RE Msg: 2226 by lyingcheat:

All the rest is just busy work that pans out to a whole lot of promise followed by the eventual fallout. Who can afford the scientific marvels achieved in the medical system in the U.S.A.???? Yawn.
Relating your comment to evolution of human society, which is what it seems to be about - it's a bit hard to tell frankly - you should consider writing in whole sentences, you'd lose the ability to keep saying "That isn't what I meant", but you might gain the comprehension of the audience?

But anyway, it seems to be a negative summary of the value of organised science in regard to human evolution?
I think that it's an indictment of HOW science happens to be organised in our society in its current framework, which tends to be industrial science.

The public has generally been educated in science classes according to the wishes of their own government, as most people in Western countries go to schools that either are run by their government, or follow a national curriculum that has been set by their government.

The public generally see science as something that only a scientist does, and that only a scientist understands, and that for them to gain from science, it must either be bought as an expensive product that is produced by a corporation, or it must be given to them by a licensed practitioner, such as a doctor, either a private doctor, or a government-sponsored doctor, or a doctor from a recognised charitable organisation, such as the WHO.

The public generally don't seem to believe that they can understand science, in ways that allow them to put science into motion directly.

Media news reports of scientific discoveries seem to support this view.

A good example of this, is a recent discovery that lycopene can protect strongly against many cancers. A pill is being developed from tomato, which contains lycopene. Of course, one could eat tomatoes on a regular basis, and also gain an additional strong protection against cancer. But that wasn't presented.

Another example is a very recent scientific report that Manuka honey could be used by hospitals to combat MRSA, as it can protect against MRSA, and that even if someone does get MRSA, that Manuka honey can help weaken MRSA in ways that would allow antibiotics can work to kill it. However, the news reports didn't seem to suggest that one could eat Manuka honey before going in to hospital, in order to ensure that one doesn't catch MRSA in hospital, and didn't seem to suggest that it would be in one's interest, that if one did contract MRSA in hospital, that one could buy some Manuka honey, and ask one's doctor for some antibiotics.

Scientific papers also seem to support this view, as their language, even in their summations, tend to be quite abstruse, using jargon that would floor most people.

Largely, that makes people feel that they have to accept the instructions of authorities on the subject of science that can help them, and cannot help themselves. These days, they tend to be people in large organisations, which function on an industrial, large-scale basis, such as governments, corporations, and very large charitable organisations. These days, people are a lot more mistrustful of large organisations. People often mistrust politicians, who dictate government policy, and often believe they are either incompetent, or corrupt and only interested in lining their own pockets, or both. People also mistrust corporations, as being only interested in making as much money as possible, and not caring about harm to the common man or woman.

It's pretty scary, when you have been taught to accept that the only way that science can help you, is from some faceless organisation, whose employees promise you that they are doing it all for your best interest, but when things have gone wrong in the past, and when they have, these organisations have been too big to be held accountable by the individual poor man or woman.

It's even more scary, if you ever come to look at the science, and realise that a lot of that science COULD have been applied by individuals as well as on the industrial level, to their benefit, and that the only way that people would suffer, is that those in power on large organisations would no longer hold a monopolising cartel on the benefit that science can give you.

It can be terrifying, when you realise that 99% of the scientists who come up with these discoveries, live off the money they are paid by these organisations, and so these organisations can simply intimidate scientists to support the agendas of these organisations, because they control whether these scientists' children get food to eat. It can make you wonder if you aren't being sold a load of BS just to keep these corporations and governments in power.

But rather than being negative, why not post wonderfully descriptive tales of the benefits of organised religion on human society?
I COULD start off by talking about "equity", the concept on which things like rent control, and fair play to the poorer man, are based.

Equity comes from the Courts of the Chancery.

Originally, the Kings of England set up 2 sets of courts, the King's Bench, which belonged to the King, and followed the kings' ideas about law, and the Courts of the Chancery, which were courts the king allowed his Chancellors to run. The position of the Chancellor used to be given to a religious leader, usually a bishop or a priest, that the king favoured. So the Courts of the Chancery were run by the Church, and were thus run by church law. Church law took a lot from the Bible and Xianity in general, and developed the idea that one must be fair ("equitable") to one's fellow man, no matter how poor. As a result, when a poor person found that the king's law favoured the rich, he went to the Courts of the Chancery to complain. If the Chancery found that the poor man was treated unfairly, they would often appeal the decision. Hence, the Courts of the Chancery morphed into what is now called the Courts of Appeal. These 2 concepts were some of what passed into the legislature and procedure of many former English colonies, including America and Canada.

So just remember, when you find a court's decision unfair, and wish to appeal it, or you find that you want to get justice from the courts on the basis of what is fair, you got it from the Courts of the Chancery, who took it from the concepts of the church.

Or, I COULD start off by mentioning that the ultra-religious Muslims who took over Spain in only a few years, transformed it into a virtual paradise, where several historians have stated that Moorish Cordova was so advanced, that it was as advanced as Victorian London. Imagine! Cordova was 1000 years ahead of its time. Think where we would be if we were 1000 years ahead of today!

Now realise that Cordova was built by ultra-religious Muslims, who believed that the best way to convert others, was to show off how wonderful Islam was, by making such marvels.

It was religion that motivated the Moors to make Cordova 1000 years ahead of its time.

Or, I COULD start off by mentioning that although historians disagree as when the Scientific Revolution started, they seem to agree that it was brought about only because of introduction of translations of Arabic manuscripts that contained Greek, Roman and Arabic science. These manuscripts came from Muslims. The earliest universities were in Muslim lands, such as in Baghad, Cordova, Fez, and Timbuktu. Historians have asked Muslim scholars why the Early Muslims were so interested in science, both to make the effort to preserve the manuscripts of heathen Greek and Roman science, and to advance so much science themselves. Muslim scholars have explained that the Early Muslims found passages in the Koran which led them to believe that Mohammed had equated study and knowledge with the highest levels of following Islam.

So it was religion that basically kick-started Science as we know of it, and without it, there is every reason to believe that we would be at least 1500 years behind, or even that Science would never have really got going in Western countries at all.

IMHO, Muslims only became opposed to science, when it became clear that the Muslims of Al-Andalus, the Muslim name for Moorish Spain, had become so successful thanks to their scientific learning and technology, that they became very decadent, and even started fighting among each other, which historians have said was the main reason why Xians managed to take back Spain. It probably occurred to many non-learned Muslims, that their learned brethren had become corrupted by that scientific learning, and became distrustful of it, so as not to come to the same fate.

Or, I COULD mention that the abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire, was largely due to the efforts of William Wilberforce, a very religious evangelist, and by the religious Quakers who backed him. Wilberforce was just another wealthy MP, until he converted to Evangelistic Xianity, at which point, he took on the role of an extreme social crusader, not just on slavery, but on many other social issues to protect those who were downtrodden by society, as an expression of his evangelism.

Human society and religion aren't always at loggerheads. Quite often, human society was actually advanced BECAUSE of religion.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 1035
view profile
History
Evolution
Posted: 4/21/2011 7:51:46 PM
RE Msg: 2241 by Paul K:
Well, I hate to break it to you, but the ultra-religious muslims that took over Spain, did so at the point and the edge of a sword, not by running popularity campaigns showing their latest gadgets............ They did so because their interpretaion of their holy book told them to do so.
Thank you.

I already knew that. But thanks anyway.

I agree entirely that the Early Muslims conquered much of the known world in a military wave, based on their understanding of Islam. One of them even wrote that he only stopped at Spain, because of the Atlantic Ocean.

As far as the virtual paradise, it was a paradise, unless you were one of the original Spainiards who wanted to keep on worshiping as they did before the muslims came through and took everything at the edge of the blade of their long curved swords. Like they used to say in the Soviet Unions, You're not having a party, unless you are in the party.......................

Just pointing out a few little inconsistancies with your paragraph and actuall history.
Jews refer to the time of Al-Andalus as The Golden Age of Spain, because it was one of the few times in history that Jews were allowed to live in peace. Jews even were allowed to have their own courts of justice in Al-Andalus, according to Jewish law.

I seriously doubt that Jews were allowed to live in peace, but not Xians.

Historians have pointed out that Daniel of Morley went to Toledo, where Jews, Xians, and Muslims were translating ancient scientific documents. He took translations of them back to England, where he handed many of them to his patron, John of Oxford, who used them to establish a center of learning known as Oxford University, the second oldest university in the Western World, that is still running today.

FYI, the view of the Reconquista that was taught to Westerners, has been shown by atheist secular historians, to be just a revisionist history. One of the descendants of the most famous hero of the Reconquista, Guzman El Bueno, found that her own heroic ancestor was actually a moor. It is now believed that many of those crusading knights for fought for the Xians, were actually Muslim mercenaries. It is now believed by historians, that rather than the Xians taking back the lands they lost much earlier, the Muslims fought amongst themselves, and vastly weakened their own defences. Mercenaries would then siege their cities, and then accept huge ransom payments. For hundreds of years, Xian soldiers got very wealthy in this way. Then, having become very wealthy and very powerful and important soldiers and protectors, they were allowed or encouraged to marry into the wealthy families of Xian Spain.

The Catholic Monarchs finally reclaimed the kingdom of Granada in 1492. However, they did so not by battle, but by the Sultan and the Catholic Monarchs signing a treaty. The treaty's terms were that the Sultan surrender the lands of Granada, in return for Muslims in Spain to be treated fairly under Xian rule. You can read its full articles here:
http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/treaty1492.html

FYI, it was the Jews who funded the campaign on Granada, as Abarbanel was the chief tax collector for Isabella, and it was usually the Jews who could be relied upon to stump up for a king or queen's goals, under threat of persecution if they refused, because they tended to be good with money, much as they are today.

However, after the Catholic Monarchs got Spain back, they re-wrote history. The Jews were mercilessly hounded out of Spain, or forced to convert. Much later, similar persecutions and hounding happened to the Muslims. Historical records were re-written to claim that all the mercenaries for the Xians were actually noble Xian knights. Records of architecture were expunged, to the extent that until recently, Spaniards were raised to think that all the great palaces of Spain were built by Catholics, even though the architecture of much of the palaces of Southern Spain is almost identical to that found all over the Muslim world.

However, I wouldn't entirely put this at the feet of Catholicism. Ferdinand's father had been somewhat of a land-grabber and showed quite a lust for power. So I can well imagine that he had enemies, with many rumouring that he had forced his way into the monarchy. Isabella's mother was rumoured to have taken lovers. It was suggested that Isabella's father was not her mother's husband. So it was rumoured that she had no true claim to the throne of Castille. Isabella's mother was also rumoured to be mad. This would have equally suggested that Isabella could have inherited her mother's madness, making her quite unsuitable as a monarch. So all in all, they both had they rivals for the position of king and queen.

Back then, that was enough to cause revolts and even a revolution. It had happened before, even in a country with as strong monarchs as England. Something had to be done to show that Ferdinand and Isabella were too powerful to oppose.

Spain had not been totally held by Xians for 800 years. Taking back Granada would have shown that they had the power to conquer a sub-continent, and would have silenced their rivals.

But to accomplish such a show of power, and then to admit that they owed anything they accomplished to Muslims or Jews, might have been perceived by Ferdinand and Isabella as being seen as a sign of weakness by their rivals, that they weren't really as powerful as they made out, and could be overthrown.

So I suspect that the inquisitions and revisionism were just Ferdinand and Isabella's, and their descendants', way of using people and records as pawns to cement political power, to keep themselves in the power and riches that they fought so hard to obtain.
 Quello79
Joined: 7/18/2010
Msg: 1036
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 4:15:02 AM

And after the water covered the entire Earth

Genesis 7:19-20 (King James Version)
19And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

Those that went to higher ground drowned, their bodies sank, and mingled with the bodies of all the animals that didn't have the intelligence & means to get to higher ground when fleeing from a flood.

But yet, again, we have fossils of prehistoric animals but no human fossils mixed in among them. So your explanation doesn't work; back to the drawing board Quello79.


Yes the whole Earth was covered with water. And while the animals who drowned first were being buried by the millions of tons of sedimentary rock, humans etc were able to get to higher ground. So no, I do not need to go back to the drawing board, that theory is perfectly sound.


Hmmm we can't manage that today using modern methods & techniques to try to get rid of rats.


I think we can safely say dinosaurs would be a lot easier to find than rats. I imagine rats breed a lot more and have better skills of evasion too. We can kill rats and I don't think we have an agenda to exterminate their species. I think the RSPCA would have something to say about that.


why not just say alien hunters in UFOs killed all the dinosaurs?


Erm, because dragon slayers were real people and famous for doing so. St George is even the patron saint of Aragon, Catalonia, England, Ethiopia, Georgia, Greece, India, Iraq, Lithuania, Palestine, Portugal, Serbia and Russia, as well as the cities of Genoa, Amersfoort, Beirut, Fakiha, Bteghrine, Cáceres, Ferrara, Freiburg, Kumanovo, Ljubljana, Pomorie, Preston, Qormi, Rio de Janeiro, Lod, Barcelona, Moscow, Tamworth and the Maltese island of Gozo, as well as a wide range of professions, organizations and disease sufferers.
Why do dragons appear in so many cultures around the world? Erm, perhaps because man used to live with them? But of course nowadays they are called dinosaurs due to the word being introduced in 1842 by Richard Owen.


No evidence for any of these creatures exists. Someone claiming they saw them isn't evidence.

As I've already said, dragons appear in many cultures all over the world. Which makes it quite clear that man lived with them. I understand there's no definitive proof that they still exist today, but so many people claim to have seen them. Why would they make it up? There's no reason to do that, and at risk of being ridiculed too. Would be easier to just keep quiet about it instead of becoming a social outcast, or being known as the village idiot. But people feel so compelled to get the truth out there.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 1037
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 4:28:58 AM

Erm, because dragon slayers were real people and famous for doing so.

No, they were real aliens. After all, spaceships can reach higher ground than men on foot can.

Would be easier to just keep quiet about it instead of becoming a social outcast, or being known as the village idiot.

Well, education is a little more difficult than either of those alternatives, but it's not that difficult.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 1038
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 7:48:44 AM

Yes the whole Earth was covered with water. And while the animals who drowned first were being buried by the millions of tons of sedimentary rock, humans etc were able to get to higher ground. So no, I do not need to go back to the drawing board, that theory is perfectly sound.


Wow!! Just....wow!!! And he's from the U.K. and not the Bible Belt! So, like dysentery, it looks like the infection of creationism is spreading. Sadly, both produce vast quantities of similar end-products.

Anyway, see if you can wrap your head around this video. It actually does a much better job of stating the case against The Flood as anything I could do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8SizmM-_5M&feature=relmfu

Good luck.
 Quello79
Joined: 7/18/2010
Msg: 1039
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 9:22:39 AM
Alan, you answered your own question. They managed to keep alive a little longer, which is why they appeared in rock layers higher up.

Of course dragons existed. Do you deny the existence of dinosaurs? Why does the Chinese calendar consists of many animals, one of which is a dragon? Why put in a "mythical" creature among all the real ones? Why does the Welsh flag have a "mythical" creature on it? Notice no flags with vampires or werewolves.
Ghosts are actually real and consistant with the Bible. However, I don't believe them to be dead people, but angels and demons (who can manifest themselves as dead people if they wish to).
Yes some people do hear voices, demonic possession is real, of which documentaries and films have been made about true accounts. And yes, some people can hear God too.
 Quello79
Joined: 7/18/2010
Msg: 1040
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 2:52:32 PM

Raises hand...

Ok... Do unicorns exist?


Quite possibly a rhino, sinoceratops or monoclonius.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 1041
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 3:22:57 PM

Seeing how "creationism" has been around a whole lot longer that evolution, one could say that your statement applies to evolution more than it does to creation...........


And Hindu creation mythology, First Nations creation stories, Zoroastrian creation, Egyptian creation, Roman creationism, etc., etc., etc. So Christian fundamentalist creationism is really the upstart.

The advantage of evolution, however, is that it derives not from personal bias, wishful thinking and collective vanity but from hard-earned study and discovery.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 1042
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 3:49:40 PM
The Earth was also flat far longer than it has been round. It also resided on the back of turtle far longer than it has been orbiting alone in space. Diseases were caused by evil spirits far longer than bacteria and viruses caused them. Slavery was considered proper and expected behavior far longer than it has been frowned upon. Women were second class citizens far longer than they have been "granted" a semblence of equality. Just because thousands of creation stories have been around longer, does this grant superstion equal rights with reality?
 Quello79
Joined: 7/18/2010
Msg: 1043
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 4:01:09 PM

Just because thousands of creation stories have been around longer, does this grant superstion equal rights with reality?


What's superstition got to do with anything? I'm a YEC (Young Earth Creationist) and I'm not superstitious. He's just stating that the creation account in Genesis was written before evolution theory came about, not that this fact makes an argument of authority over evolution theory. Contrary to popular belief, I believe Genesis 1 could have been written before anything else at all and written by God before He made man. If you compare Gen 1 with Gen 2, there's a difference in style. And there was nobody else around to write Gen 1, unless dictated by God to man.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 1044
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 4:21:26 PM
Just because someone wrote something down a few thousand years ago, based on hear-say oral "evidence", and that the original has been edited, translated, and re-translated, simplified, and amplified for effect, does not make any superstitious mythology credible or true. The Flying Spaghetti Monster creation myth has every bit as much as Genesis. And whatever happened to Lillith by the way?
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 1047
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 8:00:55 PM
The advantage of evolution, however, is that it derives not from personal bias, wishful thinking and collective vanity but from hard-earned study and discovery.


The advantage of evolution is no different than the advantage of creationism, for those who adhere to either. Spontaneous life is not, in fact, answered by evolution without assumptions, as opposed to scientific fact. That there exist those assumptions only provides evidence that one must have faith in something in order to find a way to defend their belief. Science begins at a point, thereby making it easier for some of us to accept certain theories. My point is that no one assumption, regardless of scientific "evidence" backing that assumption, is superior or points to the intellectual or logical superiority of its proponents. Creation is either spontaneous or supernatural, I have no idea what would make one think that choosing one over the other makes one "smarter" or more logical. Believing that ecoli bacteria somehow morphed into humans as we know them today is no more or less evidence of intelligence than is the belief that there is higher being who created what eventually led to what we see walking around today.
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 1048
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 8:19:57 PM

The advantage of evolution is no different than the advantage of creationism, for those who adhere to either. Spontaneous life is not, in fact, answered by evolution without assumptions, as opposed to scientific fact.
/snip/
My point is that no one assumption, regardless of scientific "evidence" backing that assumption, is superior or points to the intellectual or logical superiority of its proponents.

Creation is either spontaneous or supernatural, I have no idea what would make one think that choosing one over the other makes one "smarter" or more logical.

Despite your obviously desperate wish that it were not so... an inability to comprehend fairly basic logic and to distinguish between rational deduction and wishful thinking probably does have implications regarding the 'intelligence' of those so lacking.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 1049
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 9:59:49 PM
...and it all comes down to who knows what? Between these two forces lies the truth.
And it supports both viewpoints re: evolution. After that just sit back and enjoy. Yep, lying cheat you are also subject to scrutiny and dubiousness. Welcome to the club.
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 1050
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 10:37:56 PM

Yep, lying cheat you are also subject to scrutiny and dubiousness. Welcome to the club.

Include me out. I'm not making any unsupported claims.
By suggesting we're somehow in the same 'club' you only demonstrate my description of certain types of thinking, in post#2264, probably applies to your logical processes.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 1051
Evolution.
Posted: 4/22/2011 11:43:17 PM
Actually logical processes do include you as part of everything. We are all part of a whole. You cannot separate yourself from the whole, from the everything. Your logical processes are also suspect as mine. Somewhere in the middle are the wise.
And its Easter and the season of redemption. OOOOPS. Wrong thing to say. That statement would be considered religious, (spiritual), uneducated and just plain stupid. Right? At any rate....Welcome to the eye of scrutiny and dubiousness... and hope you have a nice ,rich, chocolate Easter egg. mmm.
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 1052
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 4/23/2011 12:29:07 AM

Actually logical processes do include you as part of everything. We are all part of a whole. You cannot separate yourself from the whole, from the everything.

I didn't try to exclude myself from 'logical processes' so I don't know why you're arguing that I'm really part of them. I just said I haven't made any unsupported claims.

Your logical processes are also suspect as mine.

To reiterate, don't include me in your 'club'. I haven't claimed, as you have in the past, that pencils (and sunsets) are evidence of god's existence.
With respect, your "logical processes" are clearly very different to mine and if you can't comprehend that, well... as I said, all you do is demonstrate your "logical processes" are described in post#2264.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 1053
Evolution.
Posted: 4/23/2011 1:28:38 AM
Well, I will reiterate that you are not in a club that puts you at the front of the pack. Pencils and sunsets would be a good thing to inscribe on any grave. What is more powerful than the word written by a pencil, what is more magnificent than the sunset. Read your mentioned post and did not get shaken into an altered state. Logic is only useful when you are dealing with the obvious. All natural and physical forces have always been present for discovery. What is important is how you handle the knowledge. Synthesis of the obvious and a way to be just. Hard to do. Science
is in the status quo and the status quo is usually what governs our lives.. P. S. ..remember the magic of writing with a pen or pencil. Your hand in free and keyboardless motion. More effort and less instant gratification.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >