Why creationism is a total farse

[atrasicarius]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

There is no evidence.

The choice is to believe that the incredibly diverse and well ordered webs of life that exist on this planet all came about on their own, with no one starting the process nor guiding it along the way, or

to believe that there is an intelligence greater than man's behind it all.

There is no proof one way or the other. You can talk about "probabilities" all you want, but it is meaningless when you don't factor in the role of natural selection. You can make either/or arguments that posit that evolution proves that the first option is the only one, but there is nothing in the theory that says life evolved all on its own.

So, the choice of option 1 or option 2 is a matter of philosophical position. Both require faith. Neither are proven.

Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What evidence are you looking for that you're not finding?

 

[atrasicarius]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

atrasicarius = "Self replicating molecules could potentially have taken hundreds of thousands or
even millions of years to evolve into the first cells.
It's not something I would expect to see in a lab.
A computer simulation might be able to do it."

Then quit teaching evolution in the schools as scientific fact . . . . it's not . . . . continue

atrasicarius = "That was in regard to the theory of abiogenesis, not the theory of evolution.
Abiogenesis has a fair amount of indirect evidence, but no direct evidence.
Evolution, on the other hand, has enormous amounts of direct evidence.

micro ( which is not evolution ) has evidence .. NOT macro ( species from other species evolution ) has NO evidence .. meanwhile . . .

Quit teaching MACRO evolution in the schools as scientific fact . . . . it's not . . . . continue

atrasicarius = "There's also the THEORY of gravity, the heliocentric THEORY, the THEORY of relativity,
the THEORY of electromagnetism..." . . . don't forget the THEORY of Intelligent Design . . . you shouldn't feel so threatened .. continue

I'll respond to you when you post your arguments here and stop advertising for some other random forum.

Also, learn how to use the quote button. It's really not that complicated.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What evidence are you looking for that you're not finding?

Evidence that there is, or that there isn't an intelligence higher than man's, i. e. a god or gods.

 

[sookster]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

I used to know this, but I am wondering if someone could remind me....

How do you take a theory and make it a scientific law? What is the specific difference? Sorry for being dumb.

 

[atrasicarius]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Evidence that there is, or that there isn't an intelligence higher than man's, i. e. a god or gods.

Well, that's a separate issue than evolution. Evolution is correct whether god exists or not.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Well, that's a separate issue than evolution. Evolution is correct whether god exists or not.

Exactly the point I've been making.

Evolution is a scientific theory. Theism/atheism is a philosophical stance for which there is no proof one way or the other.

 

[dadman]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Verthaine = "Can you supply the evidence?" .. click on the word "education"
I have no conversation with the willfully ignorant

 

[dadman]

Why evolution is a total farse

The Origins of Information: Exploring and Explaining Biological Information

In the 21st century, the information age has finally come to biology. We now know that biology at its root is comprised of information rich systems, such as the complex digital code encoded in DNA. Groundbreaking discoveries of the past decade are revealing the information bearing properties of biological systems.

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer, a Cambridge trained philosopher of science is examining and explaining the amazing depth of digital technology found in each and every living cell such as nested coding, digital processing, distributive retrieval and storage systems, and genomic operating systems.

Meyer is developing a more fundamental argument for intelligent design that is based not on a single feature like the bacterial flagellum, but rather on a pervasive feature of all living systems. Alongside matter and energy, Dr. Meyer shows that there is a third fundamental entity in the universe needed for life: information . . . . continue

 

[Redress]

Seriously, why do you keep linking to some random message board no one has ever heard of or cares about and blogs no one reads? If it is supposed to be evidence for your position, well, it's a message board and a blog. If it is advertising, well, I don't think any one is dumb enough to click on the links.

 

[atrasicarius]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Exactly the point I've been making.

Evolution is a scientific theory. Theism/atheism is a philosophical stance for which there is no proof one way or the other.

Right, got it. I thought you were saying something different.

 

[dadman]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Got Science? Genesis 1 and Evidence



Many scientists say complex life just randomly happened ..
Primordial soup + lightning strike = Bingo! Is there any shred of scientific evidence that life was CREATED as Genesis 1 claims?
Dr. Stephen Meyer .. author of SIGNATURE IN THE CELL .. says not a shred ..
Rather .. a ton .. Learn good reasoning techniques here

 

[Dittohead not!]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Got Science? Genesis 1 and Evidence



Many scientists say complex life just randomly happened ..
Primordial soup + lightning strike = Bingo! Is there any shred of scientific evidence that life was CREATED as Genesis 1 claims?
Dr. Stephen Meyer .. author of SIGNATURE IN THE CELL .. says not a shred ..
Rather .. a ton .. Learn good reasoning techniques here

As a general rule, good reasoning leads to clarity of thought. Clarity of thought, in turn, leads to clarity of expression and language.

 

[scourge99]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Got Science? Genesis 1 and Evidence



Many scientists say complex life just randomly happened ..
Primordial soup + lightning strike = Bingo! Is there any shred of scientific evidence that life was CREATED as Genesis 1 claims?
Dr. Stephen Meyer .. author of SIGNATURE IN THE CELL .. says not a shred ..
Rather .. a ton .. Learn good reasoning techniques here

Do you see a pattern?
* We don't know why our crops failed so "God-did-it".
* We don't know how the sun moves across the sky so "God-did-it".
* We don't know why lightening occurs so "God-did-it".
* We don't why the earth shakes so "God-did-it".
* We don't know why there are so many different types of plants and animals so "God-did-it".
* We don't know how life first started so "God-did-it".
* We don't know exactly how consciousness works so "God-did-it"?
* We don't know how the universe started so "God-did-it".

You present the latest iteration of flawed thinking that has existed for thousands of years: We don't know how or why X occurs but I can imagine a god-did-it therefore I believe "God-did-it".

 

[RoccoR]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

scourge99, dadman, atrasicarius, et al,

Science does not care if you imagine "Intelligent Design" (ID) in a natural pattern or not. Science doesn't care if you imagine a "Supreme Being," or not. Science wants to discover how things work.

Do you see a pattern?
... ... ...

You present the latest iteration of flawed thinking that has existed for thousands of years: We don't know how or why X occurs but I can imagine a god-did-it therefore I believe "God-did-it".

(COMMENT)

Whether or not the scientist believes in some, yet undisclosed illusive Deity, makes no difference to the scientific inquiry.

I'm quite sure, that the complexities of the universe, as we know them today, would sound like magic to the theologist and philosophers --- religious leaders and kings of the ancient world. I'm quite sure that if the ancient world had been exposed to the knowledge and science, medicine and mechanics, that any teenager commonly uses today, it would have seemed "God-Like;" 2000, 1000, even 500 years ago. And in another 2000, if these discussions are ever recovered, they will advanced culture will look upon them with a smile and a chuckle, just as we look upon the believers of Greek Gods, today.

Albert Einstein wanted to know what the Grand Plan was; the intentions of the Supreme Being. How the "Supreme Being" may have accomplished it all, was just the details in the inquiry of science.

It might be the case, since the beginning of time, that the forces that unleashed the universe happened in a particular way, because it could not have happened any other way. That life, in what the ID Followers see as the signature of God, is abundant in the universe. That Earth is not the only place in the universe that exhibits the conditions necessary for the development of life. After all, every element of our being came from the stars.

How will Religious Believers handle that knowledge?

ID makes sense only if we accept that the development of the cell, and similar wonders, could not have naturally occurred. We are well on the way to demonstrating that it is reproducible (both in chemical-physics and micro-biology). We would be farther along if the Religious Fervor had not retarded Stem Cell research; much like the Religion tried to retard the heliocentric model in science.

If the theist of today want to advance the concept of ID, I am not opposed to that. As science moves forward, in time ID will look as foolish in the future as does the Pope's prosecution of Galileo does today. And then the concept of a "Supreme Being" as promoted by the Theist, will be even more discredited.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Cephus]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Evidence that there is, or that there isn't an intelligence higher than man's, i. e. a god or gods.

Lacking evidence that such exists, only a fool believes that there is. The only logical course of action is to reject such a claim provisionally until such evidence is found. The same goes for unicorns, fairies, Bigfoot and honest politicians. Believing something without evidence is absurd.

 

[obvious Child]

They could have.

Or, they might not have.

No one really knows for sure.

True, but is far more plausible then the argument that relies on essentially magic.

We know for a fact that trillions of chemical reactions occur every second in a tiny spec of dirt. Expand that a trillion times and then do it for every second for a billions years and you get quite a number of reactions.

 

[obvious Child]

All you just did was prove me right. I asserted it's called the theory of evolution

Thanks for showing us you do not understand what a scientific theory is.

You don't need to call something a theory just to explain how it works.

Again, thanks for showing us you do not understand what a scientific theory is.

Thanks for pwning yourself, you're now dismissed.

See above.

 

[obvious Child]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

You can make either/or arguments that posit that evolution proves that the first option is the only one, but there is nothing in the theory that says life evolved all on its own.

No one ever said life evolved on its own. Life evolved based on the environmental conditions it faced. That is hardly "on its own." The fact we breath oxygen is due to life evolving to take advantage of increasing levels of oxygen in Earth's atmosphere. Evolution is merely a process which acts upon organisms based on their environments. I haven't seen a theory which argues life evolved on its own, which would mean evolving outside of environmental conditions.

 

[CarlF]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Creationism is retarded. All I should have to say is "carbon dating" and the conversation should be done.

 

[RoccoR]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

CarlF, et al,

Yeah, well that actually doesn't answer the question of design.

Creationism is retarded. All I should have to say is "carbon dating" and the conversation should be done.

(COMMENT)

It is a method of measuring the radioactive decay (14^C-to-12^C) or dating. It doesn't answer the question of life and the universe being a product of design by a "Supreme Being" (a high power).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[atrasicarius]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

CarlF, et al,

Yeah, well that actually doesn't answer the question of design.

​

(COMMENT)

It is a method of measuring the radioactive decay (14^C-to-12^C) or dating. It doesn't answer the question of life and the universe being a product of design by a "Supreme Being" (a high power).

Most Respectfully,
R

Well yeah, but it does put a small dent in the whole 6000 year old Earth bit.

 

[majora$$hole]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Well yeah, but it does put a small dent in the whole 6000 year old Earth bit.

didn't you know? god sped up time to fool us all. (not my arguement just one i've heard.)

 

[Dittohead not!]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

No one ever said life evolved on its own. Life evolved based on the environmental conditions it faced. That is hardly "on its own." The fact we breath oxygen is due to life evolving to take advantage of increasing levels of oxygen in Earth's atmosphere. Evolution is merely a process which acts upon organisms based on their environments. I haven't seen a theory which argues life evolved on its own, which would mean evolving outside of environmental conditions.

When I say "on its own" I mean that no intelligence guided the process or set it up to begin with. Evolution does not say that life evolved all on its own, i.e., with no intelligent guidance, nor does it say that it didn't. Evolution is science, theology is philosophy.

Consider the tomato. I just picked the first one of the season this morning.

Now, that tomato plant is growing according to environmental conditions and the DNA contained in the tomato seed. It needs water, carbon dioxide, sunshine, warm temperatures, some of which it would not have had I not tinkered with the environment some. I didn't create the tomato plant, just gave it a good start and an advantage over the weeds with which it competes, and some protection from snails and insects.

Now, did the tomato plant grow all on its own? Was it created? How exactly did it come to be?

 

[CarlF]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

CarlF, et al,

Yeah, well that actually doesn't answer the question of design.

​

(COMMENT)

It is a method of measuring the radioactive decay (14^C-to-12^C) or dating. It doesn't answer the question of life and the universe being a product of design by a "Supreme Being" (a high power).

Most Respectfully,
R

It certainly disproves creationism. And that's what this thread is about, not a higher power in general.

 

[obvious Child]

Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

When I say "on its own" I mean that no intelligence guided the process or set it up to begin with.

Intelligence? How do we define intelligence? Simple bacteria respond to stimuli. Is that intelligence?

Evolution does not say that life evolved all on its own, i.e., with no intelligent guidance, nor does it say that it didn't. Evolution is science, theology is philosophy.

Consider the tomato. I just picked the first one of the season this morning.

Now, that tomato plant is growing according to environmental conditions and the DNA contained in the tomato seed. It needs water, carbon dioxide, sunshine, warm temperatures, some of which it would not have had I not tinkered with the environment some.

This is kind of a bad example. Tomatos naturally grow where they are best suited for. By bringing you in and discussing the tomato we are no longer actually discussing life's capacity to grow and change on its own.

I didn't create the tomato plant, just gave it a good start and an advantage over the weeds with which it competes, and some protection from snails and insects.

But you are changing its enviroment away from what it normally grows it.

Now, did the tomato plant grow all on its own? Was it created? How exactly did it come to be?

From something far more simplier.