- Joined
- Nov 24, 2018
- Messages
- 13,199
- Reaction score
- 2,896
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Atheism and materialism have been around for a long time...
Darwin's theory has not been verified scientifically...
...there is no evidence for it....
...it is wildly improbable....
...how and why evolution happened is as much as mystery as ever....
...it says that individuals who are capable of surviving are more likely to survive....
...it says nothing....
...natural selection does explain certain things. But does it explain evolution? Lots of people say it does. But how do they know?
...the trickery is in pretending that evidence for evolution is evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution....
... ID has been called creationism and banned from science education....
...one of the most important questions of our time -- Could life have evolved by chance? -- can't be asked or answered....
Evolution is true. I said that already. Natural selection is true -- it can't not be true.
But we have NO evidence that natural selection causes evolution.
Please try to pay attention.
Natural selection AND random mutation
Please try to pay attention.
Atheism and materialism have been around for a long time, at least since ancient Greece. There was always tension between science and the authority of the Catholic church, and religion in general. Atheism was sometimes a kind of defiance, a rebellion against dogmatic authoritarianism.
In the 19th century, Darwin's idea about the cause of evolution seemed to support atheism. Evolution was not a new idea, but Darwin's theory was new. He speculated that random variations occur, and the most successful of these variations are the most likely to survive and reproduce. Well how could that not be true? And does it actually explain evolution?
But somehow it seemed to be a breakthrough in scientific understanding.
In the 20th century DNA was discovered, and it seemed to validate Darwin's theory of how evolution may have happened.
Remember that evolution theory was around long before Darwin. What was new and different about Darwin's theory was that it said evolution could have happened entirely by chance, without any direction from any kind of supernatural forces or beings or gods.
The 20th century science of genetics supposedly verified Darwin's theory, and it made atheism seem plausible and scientific.
Then we had Richard Dawkins and the New Atheism.
And here we are now, with an increasing number of New Atheists, materialists, rationalists, naturalists, etc. In other words, denial of the supernatural, of spirit.
Ok, is there anything wrong with all that? Well yes, there is. Darwin's theory has not been verified scientifically. Actually, there is no evidence for it. And it is wildly improbable.
So why do so many educated people believe it? Misunderstandings, trickery, politics.
The scientific evidence is for evolution. Evolution is not debatable, because we have enough evidence for it. But how and why evolution happened is as much as mystery as ever.
Natural selection (Darwin's theory) is a fact. How could it not be? It says that individuals who are capable of surviving are more likely to survive. In other words, it says nothing. But it is a nothing that had not been said before.
Natural selection does explain certain things. But does it explain evolution? Lots of people say it does. But how do they know? They don't know, they just think they know.
The trickery is in pretending that evidence for evolution is evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution.
Intelligent Design theory says that evolution could not happen by chance. But ID has been called creationism and banned from science education.
One of the most important questions of our time -- Could life have evolved by chance? -- can't be asked or answered because it's all tangled up in misunderstandings and confusion.
Evolution is true. I said that already. Natural selection is true -- it can't not be true.
But we have NO evidence that natural selection causes evolution. ...
Evolution is true. I said that already. Natural selection is true -- it can't not be true.
But we have NO evidence that natural selection causes evolution.
Please try to pay attention.
This is NOT a debate about the theory of evolution. There is evidence for evolution.
This is NOT a debate about natural selection. Natural selection has to be true.
This is about whether natural selection causes new species to evolve.
There is NO evidence that natural selection can cause new species to evolve.
Neo-Darwinists have FAITH that it did, over very long periods of time.
Faith without evidence is not science.
Keep slugging, G4N! So far in this thread you're the only one thinking about this, the only one thinking critically about evolution, the only one thinking, period.Atheism and materialism have been around for a long time, at least since ancient Greece. There was always tension between science and the authority of the Catholic church, and religion in general. Atheism was sometimes a kind of defiance, a rebellion against dogmatic authoritarianism.
In the 19th century, Darwin's idea about the cause of evolution seemed to support atheism. Evolution was not a new idea, but Darwin's theory was new. He speculated that random variations occur, and the most successful of these variations are the most likely to survive and reproduce. Well how could that not be true? And does it actually explain evolution?
But somehow it seemed to be a breakthrough in scientific understanding.
In the 20th century DNA was discovered, and it seemed to validate Darwin's theory of how evolution may have happened.
Remember that evolution theory was around long before Darwin. What was new and different about Darwin's theory was that it said evolution could have happened entirely by chance, without any direction from any kind of supernatural forces or beings or gods.
The 20th century science of genetics supposedly verified Darwin's theory, and it made atheism seem plausible and scientific.
Then we had Richard Dawkins and the New Atheism.
And here we are now, with an increasing number of New Atheists, materialists, rationalists, naturalists, etc. In other words, denial of the supernatural, of spirit.
Ok, is there anything wrong with all that? Well yes, there is. Darwin's theory has not been verified scientifically. Actually, there is no evidence for it. And it is wildly improbable.
So why do so many educated people believe it? Misunderstandings, trickery, politics.
The scientific evidence is for evolution. Evolution is not debatable, because we have enough evidence for it. But how and why evolution happened is as much as mystery as ever.
Natural selection (Darwin's theory) is a fact. How could it not be? It says that individuals who are capable of surviving are more likely to survive. In other words, it says nothing. But it is a nothing that had not been said before.
Natural selection does explain certain things. But does it explain evolution? Lots of people say it does. But how do they know? They don't know, they just think they know.
The trickery is in pretending that evidence for evolution is evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution.
Intelligent Design theory says that evolution could not happen by chance. But ID has been called creationism and banned from science education.
One of the most important questions of our time -- Could life have evolved by chance? -- can't be asked or answered because it's all tangled up in misunderstandings and confusion.
Keep slugging, G4N! So far in this thread you're the only one thinking about this, the only one thinking critically about evolution, the only one thinking, period.
The others, so far, are those who have surrendered their independent and critical faculties of thought to a faith in the infallible and unquestionable authority of physical science.
Why? Because science keeps giving them toys.
Are you familiar with the term "scientism"?
Are you familiar with those popular car tchotchkes with the bobbling heads?
You are a breath of fresh air, G4N!
Keep slugging, G4N! So far in this thread you're the only one thinking about this, the only one thinking critically about evolution, the only one thinking, period.
The others, so far, are those who have surrendered their independent and critical faculties of thought to a faith in the infallible and unquestionable authority of physical science.
Why? Because science keeps giving them toys.
Are you familiar with the term "scientism"?
Are you familiar with those popular car tchotchkes with the bobbling heads?
You are a breath of fresh air, G4N!
Thank you Angel. It is VERY hard to reason with science worshipers. After all, toys are proof that science gives us all the ultimate answers.
I have tried and tried, at other forums. Their only responses are:
A) Saying I am ignorant about evolution research.
B) Laughing.
C) Providing evidence for evolution and natural selection.
I have NEVER seen a logical scientific argument from anyone anywhere that actually supports the idea that natural selection caused the evolution of new and more complex species.
Neo-Darwinism is entirely a matter of faith, loved by people who hate religion, such as Richard Dawkins. And it is so persuasive, as long as you don't look at their arguments carefully, as long as you don't notice the trick.
Thank you Angel. It is VERY hard to reason with science worshipers. After all, toys are proof that science gives us all the ultimate answers.
I have tried and tried, at other forums. Their only responses are:
A) Saying I am ignorant about evolution research.
B) Laughing.
C) Providing evidence for evolution and natural selection.
I have NEVER seen a logical scientific argument from anyone anywhere that actually supports the idea that natural selection caused the evolution of new and more complex species.
Neo-Darwinism is entirely a matter of faith, loved by people who hate religion, such as Richard Dawkins. And it is so persuasive, as long as you don't look at their arguments carefully, as long as you don't notice the trick.
This is NOT a debate about the theory of evolution. There is evidence for evolution.
This is NOT a debate about natural selection. Natural selection has to be true.
This is about whether natural selection causes new species to evolve.
There is NO evidence that natural selection can cause new species to evolve.
Neo-Darwinists have FAITH that it did, over very long periods of time.
Faith without evidence is not science.
Do you actually know what a "species" is ?
The evidence of the finches in the Galapagos islands is evidence of natural selection at work - whereby a species evolved into different species
How about the Indian and African elephants (and yes, there are more species of elephant) these are two distinct species of animal.
Explain that one
**************
ALL the evidence supports evolution.
**************
DNA supports evolution - that different species today had common ancestors.
ie: ONE species became DIFFERENT species
Scientists believe in evolution because of EVIDENCE. They do not have a responsibility for your lack of comprehension.
Faith is by definition a believe in something without evidence.
You're saying macro evolution (the process where a species splits into two or more) doesn't happen. You say this with no evidence, indeed you say it in the face of ALL the evidence.
You should ditch your faith and rely on the evidence.
I am waiting for his theory about what drives evolution. We have had no answers yet.
dna wont always copy itself correctly
that leads to changes in living things that clone themselves you get even more with sex which is why sex is so common you get more changes faster with it
Do you actually know what a "species" is ?
The evidence of the finches in the Galapagos islands is evidence of natural selection at work - whereby a species evolved into different species
How about the Indian and African elephants (and yes, there are more species of elephant) these are two distinct species of animal.
Explain that one
**************
ALL the evidence supports evolution.
**************
DNA supports evolution - that different species today had common ancestors.
ie: ONE species became DIFFERENT species
Scientists believe in evolution because of EVIDENCE. They do not have a responsibility for your lack of comprehension.
Faith is by definition a believe in something without evidence.
You're saying macro evolution (the process where a species splits into two or more) doesn't happen. You say this with no evidence, indeed you say it in the face of ALL the evidence.
You should ditch your faith and rely on the evidence.
That is the hypothesis. There is no evidence that it explains the origin of new more complex species.
There is NO evidence that the DNA changes leading to the origin of a new more complex species are copying errors. NONE.
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?