• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why creationism is a total farse

That video is comic genius. It proves that someone can write enough code to cause a series of logical steps to create a clock.

So, in this case, God is the coder.

Did you miss the part where he specifically said he was NOT talking about that? Choose what you want to debate, evolution or abiogenesis.
 
This debate has been done to death, no amount of conjecture and hypothesis will change the simple fact that we see the universe in different ways.

evolution/abiogenesis/apes and type-writers is all kind of pointless, as its likely all and none at the same time.

I shouldn't have even started it up, sorry. I breathe, that alone stuns me.
 
Last edited:
I understand organic chemistry beyond the lay-level, but won't presume to know something I don't.

Whether God initiated the big bang and then prodded RNA into formation or mapped out DNA for each 'kind' of animal is irrelevant; what is in front of my eyes is wondrous complexity the likes of which causes my neurons to percolate.

The idea that everything exists because of random chance and 'just because' flies in the face of my life experience and reason. Not to mention the intention I see in all things, each filling in a gap, each depending on the other.

Could 1,000 monkeys type a coherent book given eternity. Nope.

What you see is called an ecosystem. And it fits so nicely because it killed all the parts that didn't fit. Nature isn't cute and cuddly like that. It's violent. Very violent. And if you are not the ideal creature to fill the niche you try to carve out, you will be destroyed without mercy.

It is in fact your supposition that monkeys cannot type the book that is the core of the whole problem. Given eternity, it is impossible that the thousand monkeys, or even one, wouldn't produce a coherent book. In fact, you could pick a specific book, and the odds of the monkeys producing it would be 100%. You are proposing an infinite sample size of a finite probability. No matter how improbable, it is guaranteed to happen.

Everything does not exist because of "random chance and 'just because'". It's much more complicated than that. Each individual event was random chance, but the repercussions of each event were anything but random. Systems that work survived, while ones that didn't disappeared. Non-biological systems, too. Not just living matter, but even on the atomic level this is true. Molecules without a stable structure fell apart and those that were stable filled up the universe. And those successful systems affected the probabilities of future events. Hydrogen filled the universe, and so things that are assisted by hydrogen are more likely to survive. And the process just keeps going and going.

The reason that intelligent creation and the current understanding of physics and biology are at odds is not because science disproves god. It's because we now know enough about how objects interact and change that god is not necessary to make it work. Nothing says that god didn't have a hand in it, such as designing the original parameters of the universe, but we know exactly how everything after the first moment of the universe's existence happened. If god is there, then he did not alter the way the universe works after that initial moment.

So, god as creator of the universe is not impossible. Very improbable, though. The biblical creation story is. The creationist movement is primarily about the latter, not the former. That is why it's a steaming pile a manure.

The reason god is improbable, by the way, stems from the same logic as the previous point. God is unnecessary to the equation, and nature really doesn't contain much that's unnecessary. And it constantly strives to trim away things that aren't needed. The very nature of existence seems to indicate that unnecessary things don't belong. Therefore, nature is contradictory to an unnecessary god as an essential part of it. Even if god created the universe, that universe is antithetical to having god as a part of it.

In addition, since a lack of god's direct intervention in the events of the universe can be proven, that means we have no knowledge of god at all. For example, miracles in scripture are shown to have completely mundane causes and are not results of divine intervention. We can't actually encounter this being on its own level, so we only know it by its actions on our level. And since there haven't been any, we cannot possibly know the nature of god. Belief systems centered around this god, about whom we know absolutely nothing, cannot be attributed to what this being actually desires.

It's actually even more complex than you think, because none of it relies on magic. That's pretty boggling to the neurons.


...

...

I don't write forum posts, I write theses... :tongue4:
 
Last edited:
As I have said in the past, and you touched based on these points, I feel that modern science provides the basis that a Creator created our system, pressed the on button, and then just started observing.

It is sort of like a mad scientist making an intricate Artificial Intelligence program. Once he starts the program, I am sure he will learn aspects of the system he created that he didn't intend on learning. Think about what we know. We know there was a particle of infinite density that imploded. We know, that the energy was not uniform, in fact, it was very variable. We know from energy creates matter, and from the interactions of that matter the system continues in complexity.

If you think about it, all the creator had to do was create an infinitely dense particle and implode it. And then.....watch, and learn. I feel that our creator is as much of a scholar as we are, and is learning not only about the system that he created, but is learning about his existence as well. There are even scientific laws that if interpreted a certain way, show that there is a creator.

For example, energy is never created or destroyed but is changing form. Then why is there energy in the first place? Could dark energy be energy injection from our creator?

For some reason, science has split from religion, however it was religion that started the first schools. It is in my view that science and religion go hand in hand. It doesn't have to be the religions defined as Hinduism, Islam, or Christian, all I am referring to is a Creator. Or maybe, a group of Creators. I don't know. The point is, science is trying to answer the most fundamental questions that we of a species have asked. It is through our understanding that I find is more evidence that there is a Creator. And for all of you skeptics out there, I respect you, as well as ask you to try one thing. Try living your life looking for a Creator, rather than always denying Him. Things will slowly but surly look different, and in my opinion, for the better.
 
Alternatively, as opposed to not 'understanding', I simply don't accept that explanation.

Nobody cares if you accept reality, it doesn't change what reality is. You can fall off the top of a tall building and scream all the way down that you don't accept gravity, doesn't change your fate.
 
Its very simple guys: Creationism as an explanation for the origin and development of life on Earth, is a total farse because the Bible is not a science book.
 
I understand organic chemistry beyond the lay-level, but won't presume to know something I don't.

so what do you believe and why about creationism?


Whether God initiated the big bang and then prodded RNA into formation or mapped out DNA for each 'kind' of animal is irrelevant;

what reason does anyone have for believing either of these are true? because they can imagine its true?

what is in front of my eyes is wondrous complexity the likes of which causes my neurons to percolate.
why does complexity indicate a designer?

False premise p1: Complexity The idea that aspects of nature are too complex to have happened by chance (or more aptly natural processes if we wish to avoid straw men) is a fallacy of argument from ignorance, or even willful ignorance, in the case where the theist also has to reject what we already know about the facts of Darwinian evolution. It is essentially tantamount to the statement “I can't think how it could have happened, therefore God did it!” It's also begging the question as to whether something can be too complex for evolution, at all. How would we know whether something is too complex without a sampling of confirmed examples contrasting natural low-complexity cases versus supernatural high-complexity cases? This has led to the formulation of such theories as Michael Behe's theory of irreducible complexity, which was laughed out of court during the Kitzmiller v. Dover court case, who when presented with counterpoints, "Professor Behe’s only response to these seemingly insurmountable points of disanalogy was that the inference still works in science fiction movies. (23:73 (Behe))”. Ray Comfort's version of the argument (in classic Ray Comfort "slap your knees" fashion) bypasses this entire premise by committing a fallacy of begging the question and simply assuming a priori in the premises that nature is a “creation”.

Argument from design - Iron Chariots Wiki

The idea that everything exists because of random chance

no one has said such a thing. this is a strawman. what has been said is that most things we examine are the result of natural processes which can be confirmed by observation and experimentation.

for things we cant yet explain it is a fallacy to claim "goddidit" just as it would be to claim that it occurred by natural forces.

and 'just because' flies in the face of my life experience and reason.

what experiences and reasoning exactly?

Not to mention the intention I see in all things, each filling in a gap, each depending on the other.

are you unaware that there are an extraordinary amount more extinct species than that are alive today? life lives and dies frequently. this planet alone going through many mass extictions are radical climate shifts. life doesn't thrive because some supernatural force is holding the puppet strings, life survives because that is what its good at. its not survival of the fittest. its survival of the fit enough.

it really makes no more sense to claim that life is intentional anymore than to say that stars are intentional or snowflakes are intentional.

Could 1,000 monkeys type a coherent book given eternity. Nope.
yes they could. this shows that you do not comprehend how long eternity actually is.
 
some people trust more in mathematical and logical explanations for the creation of the universe and life. we call these people boring.
others believe that god did it, because it seems more poetic. i failed math in school and i dont think pure reason and logic can explain
everything about the universe but i still dont buy the creationist theory cuz its just so silly !
 
Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

Yeah, that's pretty much it. I think it's fair to say that our brains didn't need any kind of divine intervention to evolve. Do you think intelligence comes from somewhere else?

I think intelligence comes from intelligence, much as oak trees spring from oak trees. Of course, there is no way to know that for sure, but it does seem more plausible than the idea that it simply sprang from nothing.
 
some people trust more in mathematical and logical explanations for the creation of the universe and life. we call these people boring.
others believe that god did it, because it seems more poetic. i failed math in school and i dont think pure reason and logic can explain
everything about the universe but i still dont buy the creationist theory cuz its just so silly !
:roll:
Well, it's good to have all that sorted out. Thanks for clearing everything up!
 
Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

I think intelligence comes from intelligence, much as oak trees spring from oak trees. Of course, there is no way to know that for sure, but it does seem more plausible than the idea that it simply sprang from nothing.

I don't mean the origin, I mean the actual, current source of our sentience. Do you think there's more to it than just our brains?
 
Re: Why evolution iis a total farse



It would be good for the evolution "scientists" to catch up with the ID scientists ..
their fear of the conclusion keeps them from being honest with the evidence ..
when man is dishonest with natural revelation ..
he will never be trusted with special revelation

ID scientists? Isn't that the oxymoron that was invented by Lester Ismore, the father of the oxymoron?
 
Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

I think intelligence comes from intelligence, much as oak trees spring from oak trees. Of course, there is no way to know that for sure, but it does seem more plausible than the idea that it simply sprang from nothing.

life as we know it was probably created in some crazy chemical reaction kinda like how human had accidentally created new elements during nuclear tests. something being created that haddnt previously existed out of pure accident and chance.
 
some people trust more in mathematical and logical explanations for the creation of the universe and life. we call these people boring.
others believe that god did it, because it seems more poetic. i failed math in school and i dont think pure reason and logic can explain
everything about the universe but i still dont buy the creationist theory cuz its just so silly !

I have the feeling you should have paid more attention in school.

Math does not explain anything, math is a symbolic language we employ to make sense of what we observe, math is not the source for anything.

Math described what we can observe and in a way which we can later re-use to get the same results as the observed results. It is used to describe connections, relations and a lot of other things we observe in reality but math is not the explanation, just the code we humans have assigned to what we see because it works!
 
That video is comic genius. It proves that someone can write enough code to cause a series of logical steps to create a clock.

So, in this case, God is the coder.
The code supplies a situation where clocks can evolve. Your analogy is equivalent to God creating the right conditions for life to evolve. Evolution is not "random chance". There is no code that defines the steps to be taken.
 
I have the feeling you should have paid more attention in school.

Math does not explain anything, math is a symbolic language we employ to make sense of what we observe, math is not the source for anything.

Math described what we can observe and in a way which we can later re-use to get the same results as the observed results. It is used to describe connections, relations and a lot of other things we observe in reality but math is not the explanation, just the code we humans have assigned to what we see because it works!

ooookaaaaay. sorry doc i was outta line
 
Re: Why evolution iis a total farse



It would be good for the evolution "scientists" to catch up with the ID scientists ..
their fear of the conclusion keeps them from being honest with the evidence ..
when man is dishonest with natural revelation ..
he will never be trusted with special revelation

How about Intelligent Design people start being honest for a change?

Intelligent Design is fundamentally no different from Animism. Do you accept that as science?
 
Re: Why evolution iis a total farse

How about Intelligent Design people start being honest for a change?

Yeah, don't hold your breath on that.
 
Back
Top Bottom