Its interesting how atheist, I may start calling them “concept of god haters” always want to steer intelligent design theory into religion and god. Pure ID theory merely puts forth the concept that some form of intelligence is behind us and what we perceive as reality, a “god” is not part of the theory, can’t you atheist concept of god haters get that through your minds?I swear you Darwinist are worse than any bible thumper or Jehovah Witness that ever knocked on my door.
Try this link if you dare,Origins of Life
Life on other planets. unexplained paranomal activity, new energy, man one day visiting differant planets or even differant galaxies, as well as demensions. all fall into te unknown factor are all to be consiidered "PROBABLY NOT".
Verthaine I actually like your concept of god.
Its interesting how atheist, I may start calling them “concept of god haters” always want to steer intelligent design theory into religion and god. Pure ID theory merely puts forth the concept that some form of intelligence is behind us and what we perceive as reality, a “god” is not part of the theory, can’t you atheist concept of god haters get that through your minds?I swear you Darwinist are worse than any bible thumper or Jehovah Witness that ever knocked on my door.
Try this link if you dare,Origins of Life
First, one should point out that not all scientists are atheists. Many Christian scientists denounce intelligent design. We're not "closed off" to an alternative theory. That would imply that we haven't considered the arguments put forth by ID theorists... We have, and we've found that they have failed to meet their burden of proof.
ID revolves mostly around Behe's "irreducible complexity" argument which basically says, "I can't think of how this evolved, therefore it must be designed." Even if we didn't know anything else about the theory we could dismiss it just from that alone. That is an argument from incredulity. Arguing from one's own ignorance is not a good start.
Moving on from there he gives examples like the bacterial flagellum. Dr. Ken Miller (who is a Christian by the way) has done a terrific job of showing how the bacterial flagellum came about through evolutionary means.
Taking this information and adding to it what we learned in the Dover case, that "intelligent design" and "creationism" are completely interchangeable in text books (Google a book called "Of Pandas and People") and you have three huge strikes against ID theory.
Scientists aren't closed off to other theories, but evolution is a fact that has been experimentally proven time and time again. From fossil records, to geographical distribution, to DNA. It plays a daily role in our lives with the production of immunization shots and numerous other medical breakthroughs. To uproot that proven reality would take an extraordinary amount of evidence from the ID theorists. They have failed to meet that burden of proof.
Also, to respond to others on this board that are attempting to disprove evolution, if you can... you should not be speaking to us. You should be writing a scientific paper that can be peer reviewed and proven true. After you do that go pick up your Nobel prize and come back here and rub it in our face.
Until then....
Oh look, it's a transitional fossil.
Well, apparently I don't have a problem replying to Verthaine. I guess you're just special, presluc.
I've stated numerous times that I "believe in God" and on post#55 I stated:
"Now if you wish to define "God" the way I and plenty of other Taoists view "God" as "being every particle and force in the universe being interconnected and influencing every other particle and force in the Universe (and possibly an infinite amount of Universes) throughout time and space (thus the Taoist and Buddhist saying "All Is One") in a way that we do not quite understand at this moment,that contains both intelligence and life within it, obeying a set of fundamental rules that we are only just beginning to discover, then yes there is plenty of evidence to support that."
And no one on this thread (or even on this this entire forum) has ridiculed me about it or told me I was foolish to believe the way I dr even said I was wrong.
Atrasicarius was the only one on this thread that made the statement:
"We don't absolutely know there is no God. We assume there is no God in the same way we assume there is no Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, or Flying Spaghetti Monster."
I believe he's talking about what atheist believe and assume.
As is his right to do so.
But what I do have to say to Atrasicarius is:
"Please do not lump the Flying Spaghetti Monster with Santa Claus,the Tooth fairy and Preslucs God.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster is waaaay cooler then them."
But that's just my opinion
I've been asking you for quite some time what are your views and beliefs about god,and I am still waiting for an answer.
Wahh,wah,wah,people are making fun of my beliefs,wah wah wah.
Wahh,wah,wah,people are making fun of my god,wah wah wah.
If Your God doesn't like it ,let Your God do something about.
So how exactly was the universe created.
Magic?
Ooohhhhh ooooga boooga Grok not understand ooooga boooga.
To paraphrase both Issac Asimov and Lex Luthor in the movie Superman Returns, "To the primitive mind, any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic". ...
Please enlighten us as to how the universe was created and the method you use to achieve that conclusion.
Didn't I already anwer that question?
Well what do you know,I did,
Post #51
The big Bang is not the exception to the rule.
Scientist do not know what was before the Big Bang or why it happened.
Only that apparently according to their ability to interpret all the evidence they have been able to review that's what how it appears to have happened .
Like I've asked you a number of times before,if you have anything better then the Big bang theory please by all means present it here for review.
Quote Originally Posted by presluc View Post
"Biology 101 living organisms evolve into living organisms
Itellectual Biologist rule
Eception to the rule, abiogenesis.
Your kidding me right?
Abiogenesis is the study of how biological life arises from inorganic matter through natural processes, and the methodby which life on Earth arose."
It is not "the exception to the rule".
No one knows how life arose from inorganic matter.
I've already stated that.
We already know that life comes from life.
We just don't know the how and why it happened in the first place.[/I]
Again I am going to ask"if you have anything better then the Big bang theory please by all means present it here for review".
Well then the answer now becomes obvious:
PROVE "YOUR" GOD EXISTS"
Gee,that should be easy,right?
You right,there is no scientific theory of creation at this moment.
Any book on astro physics will state that it is currently impossible to determine what went on 10-43 of a second before the big bang.
I will ask YOU this question
Exactly how did this Universe come to existence and what method do YOU use to determine it.
I got was theory and observation
No scientific theory of creation huh?
You should really read more post omn this thread.eace
Oops,my bad.
I got called away for a bit and I hit reply without realiziing that this part was still left and that I wasn't finished.(when the missus call's I've learned to see what she wants really quick.Love ya babe)
If a or a group of Athiest/ scientist/ biologist said that without providing the evidence to back that claim up they would be wrong to do so.
If you are trying to imply that every single Athiest/ scientist/ biologist on this planet has said that without providing the evidence to back that implication up,then you are wrong to do so.
Can you provide any links to any scientist that does say thatso that I can say that they are wrong right here on this forum
Who the hell is saying that?
Again I just checked and Occam's Razor never said that.
Stop deliberately misquoting people.
O.k. what exactly is your point?
Every avenue and every possibility should be explored.
Not "every avenue and every possibility should be explored except the ones that presluc doesn't like,makes him feel uncomfortable,or may prove his beliefs to be false"
And don't even think of trying to spin that above statement as meaning that "I said you said".
See, there's this little thing called evidence. Evidence is things you can observe in the natural world to support your theory. I can point to a rather large amount of evidence for the Big Bang and Evolution. Can you point to evidence for God? If not, then comparing it to other things with no evidence, such as Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, is entirely fair.
This is going to sound mean, but it's honestly not meant to. I think you're misunderstanding what a "theory" is in science.
You can read here for a more in depth discussion, but basically..
"Theory" in science is a model that best provides an explanation for a set of observed and confirmed facts.
In regards to evolution (the theory) explains what we see when we look at DNA evidence, transitional fossils, geology, biology, etc.
Sometimes people confuse "theory" like, "Hey... I've got a theory... what if mars is made of cheese?" "Theory" in this sense is just a hypothesis, which evolution is not.
Gravity, is a scientific theory. Plate tectonics, is a scientific theory. These aren't just scientists sitting in a room somewhere speculating on what they think this is. It's all fact based.
I'm not hiding
I'm right here!!!!
Can anyone else see post #69?
Maybe this means you need a new computer.
May I suggest one with a spellcheck feature?
Because an "ignore" (if there even is a feature like that on this site,and if I even knew where it was,which I don't) button would only prevent the person from seeing posts made by the person they pressed it against.
It wouldn't prevent you or anyone else from responding.
I wouldn't be able to see your responses,but everyone else should.
I've been begging you answer these questions for a while now.
And yet you are still trying to avoid doing so.'
So who's the one hiding?
You've been bobbing weaving and dodging like "Sugar Ray" Leonard on amphetamines.
I've actually enjoyed ripping apart your arguments like Freddy Krueger at an Elm Street teenage slumber party.
Do you even know how to "cut and paste"?
Since it is obvious you saw my post (#69) there is nothing to really prevent you from answering the questions (that I made sure everyone can see) that I posted.
The only reason it seems you have is your unwillingness to answer them.
In my opinion that makes you a coward.
How about this?
Can I please ask anyone who is viewing this thread to cut and paste the questions that I asked on post #69 onto a post of "your" making so that presluc can answer you?
Thank you
Is any and all scientific theory to be considered fact?
For if this is true would not the "theory" become fact?
For we have gravity that is fact, we have plate tectonics that is fact
Now I don't know who came up with the idea to call gravity a theory but if it was not a fact the people of earth would fly off ergo fact, As for Plate tectonics check the Andras plates "check spelling" anyway they are there they shift to much you got a problem called an earthquake that is fact
Now these are theories that became facts because they were based on facts.
When a scientist says on one hand you can not have an explosion without energy or matter and on the other says I believe THE BIG BANG THEORY started the universe on the other.
I have to question that. I would ask where the matter and energy came from
When I tell anybody that God helped to start the universe that is my belief anybody might question that, is this not a theory too?
For they would say prove that your God exist, and where did he come from.
As for evolution being a theory this is another area of scientific reserch that becomes contratictory for first scientist say mankind has evolved which I agree with but it is still a theory.
Why is not evolution considered a process for unless all living creatures have stopped they continue to evolve.eace
I've stated numerous times that I "believe in God" and on post#55 I stated:
"Now if you wish to define "God" the way I and plenty of other Taoists view "God" as "being every particle and force in the universe being interconnected and influencing every other particle and force in the Universe (and possibly an infinite amount of Universes) throughout time and space (thus the Taoist and Buddhist saying "All Is One") in a way that we do not quite understand at this moment,that contains both intelligence and life within it, obeying a set of fundamental rules that we are only just beginning to discover, then yes there is plenty of evidence to support that."
And no one on this thread (or even on this this entire forum) has ridiculed me about it or told me I was foolish to believe the way I dr even said I was wrong.
Atrasicarius was the only one on this thread that made the statement:
"We don't absolutely know there is no God. We assume there is no God in the same way we assume there is no Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, or Flying Spaghetti Monster."
I believe he's talking about what atheist believe and assume.
As is his right to do so.
But what I do have to say to Atrasicarius is:
"Please do not lump the Flying Spaghetti Monster with Santa Claus,the Tooth fairy and Preslucs God.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster is waaaay cooler then them."
But that's just my opinion
I've been asking you for quite some time what are your views and beliefs about god,and I am still waiting for an answer.
Wahh,wah,wah,people are making fun of my beliefs,wah wah wah.
Wahh,wah,wah,people are making fun of my god,wah wah wah.
If Your God doesn't like it ,let Your God do something about.
So how exactly was the universe created.
Magic?
Ooohhhhh ooooga boooga Grok not understand ooooga boooga.
To paraphrase both Issac Asimov and Lex Luthor in the movie Superman Returns, "To the primitive mind, any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic". ...
Please enlighten us as to how the universe was created and the method you use to achieve that conclusion.
Didn't I already anwer that question?
Well what do you know,I did,
Post #51
The big Bang is not the exception to the rule.
Scientist do not know what was before the Big Bang or why it happened.
Only that apparently according to their ability to interpret all the evidence they have been able to review that's what how it appears to have happened .
Like I've asked you a number of times before,if you have anything better then the Big bang theory please by all means present it here for review.
Quote Originally Posted by presluc View Post
"Biology 101 living organisms evolve into living organisms
Itellectual Biologist rule
Eception to the rule, abiogenesis.
Your kidding me right?
Abiogenesis is the study of how biological life arises from inorganic matter through natural processes, and the methodby which life on Earth arose."
It is not "the exception to the rule".
No one knows how life arose from inorganic matter.
I've already stated that.
We already know that life comes from life.
We just don't know the how and why it happened in the first place.[/I]
Again I am going to ask"if you have anything better then the Big bang theory please by all means present it here for review".
Well then the answer now becomes obvious:
PROVE "YOUR" GOD EXISTS"
Gee,that should be easy,right?
You right,there is no scientific theory of creation at this moment.
Any book on astro physics will state that it is currently impossible to determine what went on 10-43 of a second before the big bang.
I will ask YOU this question
Exactly how did this Universe come to existence and what method do YOU use to determine it.
Post # 58
It is as you say I can not answer for anybody but me, although I have a theory.
It is my belief that God can not be described for no one knows they speculate an old man flying around in the sky or a budda atop a mountain ect.
As for me I think of God as a force kinda like the wind or a high surf but with intelligence.
Post #58
I do not thing God created the universe or man I think he just gave a push to start the universe and a few living organisms to start the evolutionary procress.
Post #58
As far as my views of if God helps mankind?
To me that is a personal point of my belief., but it is said God works in mysterious ways.
Post #58
Another point of interest to me has been the afterlife some say it's heaven in the sky, maybe?.
I have a theory that it is another demension.
Post #58
Perhaps my beliefs are not acceptable to you.
Post #58
That will not change my core belief, for your beliefs are acceptable to me
Post #58
I would not ridicule or critisize your beliefs as long as my beliefs are left without too much ridicule.
Post #58
Has for the theories of CHAOS and BELL'S never being proved wrong that is correct but where have they been tested save EARTH?
I also believe that we as a species will travel to other planets and may discover other lifeforms,and may discover regions of space or even other universes where the Laws of Physics are different.Post #58
Although I may not live to see it , it has always been my belief that in the furture mankind will reach other planets and eventualy other galaxies with other life forms who may have a differant set of never proved wrong theories that exclude these theories.eace
You ask me to define God as I believe , I take it that's what you mean.
It is my faith that God exist it is my belief that God is not a being not an old man flying around in the sky not some fat guy on a mountain.
It is my belief that God is a force like the wind or rain or fire or a high surf.
What I beleve after that is personal.
And no one on this thread had stated otherwise.I have said many times I ask nobody to believe as I do be an individual believe as you choose.
And I have already stated that Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that at this moment it is totally impossible for ANYONE to say with 100 PERCENT ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY anything.However individuals may have a choice I choose not to back up for anybody unless that present proof without a shadow of a doubt.
So far nobody's done that including you vertain or whoever your posting for, ATRI-something wasn't it.
First- I notice that science is only valid when it suits your purposes.As for me I try to answer myown post.
Sorry kid I did not go waa waa waa I mearly retaliated.
For of truth if my faith in God is lumped in with Santa Clause and te Tooth Fairy.
Then Scientific theory is lumpted in with magic tricks or slight of hand or illusions.
Posters that know science should know scientific law .
For every action there is a reaction.
If you take that post as a personal attack on your beliefs then you are being childish.'Wahhh,Wahh,Wahh.We don't absolutely know there is no God. We assume there is no God in the same way we assume there is no Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, or Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Unfortunatly I can not enlighten you on how the universe was created?
I only have a belief or a faith on what might have happened maybe you consider that a guess , that's ok by me for I have no proof or no facts.
Now you might try some other post on this thread they seem to know for sure how the universe came to be.
That's all I and everyone else on this thread has been saying also.Maybe you can get the facts and proof from them ,all I got was theory and observation
" A difference that makes no difference is not a difference"No scientific theory of creation huh?
You should really read more post omn this thread.eace
This is too easy, a simple question with a yes or no answer. I'll even use big letters, consentrate on the word EVERY.
IS EVERY AVENUE AND EVERY POSSIBILITY BEIGN EXPLORED?eace
sawyerloggingin, did you take a look at the video that I mentioned and posted here: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religion-and-philosophy/104348-intelligent-design-6.html#post1059659412
Are you willing to examine the counterpoint to the claim that there is "No missing link", or is this thread every bit of what it appears to be: nothing more than a bait thread?
Golly why didn't I think of that, evidence you say?
So you have observed the Big Bang didn't think you were that old???
Unfortunatly to get evidence you must base your foundation on facts not theory.
When you have facts proving without a shadow of a doubt that creation and evolution is based entirely on science.
Come back I'll give up my faith until then keep observing.
Tip; observation + theory = unproven fact, an old but proven law of science.
Marduc forgive me but I use an air card and looking at you tube is nearly impossible for me. I barely get a connection that may be my problem.Could you perhaps put it into words?
Interesting link marduc.It makes the case for Darwinism very well. Reminds me of a lawyer in his summation at the end of a long trial. I would be interested to hear some other lawyer make his summation picking apart lawyer number ones points. One thing I noticed was the missing link thing that the guy was so adamant about. It's news to me that it has been definitely found. I think that may be opinion not fact.
"Now if you wish to define "God" the way I and plenty of other Taoists view "God" as "being every particle and force in the universe being interconnected and influencing every other particle and force in the Universe (and possibly an infinite amount of Universes) throughout time and space (thus the Taoist and Buddhist saying "All Is One") in a way that we do not quite understand at this moment,that contains both intelligence and life within it, obeying a set of fundamental rules that we are only just beginning to discover, then yes there is plenty of evidence to support that."
And no one on this thread (or even on this this entire forum) has ridiculed me about it or told me I was foolish to believe the way I dr even said I was wrong.
So from what I can gather you are stating that you view god basically the same way I do
If any one here has ridiculed you for your beliefs on this forum they are wrong to do so and they should apologize.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?