Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
EVOLVE into a decent civil forum member who will chose to cease degrading fellow forum members you disagree with.



That would be nice, Hen, but is difficult to do when so many insist we live on a flat earth, insist n teaching that to kids and insist they are right about the flat earth and my spherical theory has absolutely no evidence.

Sorry, Hen, but we can civilly disagree on democrat and republican, hot versus cold, blonde versus brunette and fat versus skinny. But when you passionately insist that the earth is flat and "flat out" refuse to look at the evidence that it is spherical, I'm sorry but you got it coming to you.

And make no mistake, the evidence for evolution is just as substantial as the evidence for a spherical earth. It just takes a little more education to understand it.

Don't like it? You got the wrong forum.



I think you should re-read the post before lashing out at HP. I am the one who posted that which you attributed to HP.

Also equating "Flat Earth" with Evolution also is not a valid statement in that it is easy enough to visually discredit a flat earth depending on just where you stand or view it from however if you look from certain perspectives then you could justify a true uncontested belief that the earth was flat and believe it sincerely because you either have a lack of evidence to the contrary or fail to accept it. Just the same as you look at certain things regarding evolution and are just as dogmatic that evolution is the vehicle by which all life came into being. In that way you evolutionist are just like the flat earth people, making dogmatic decisions on such a limited amount of evidence that is actually no evidence at all but rather someone attempting to make a square peg fit into a round hole.

For those forum members who think there is nothing wrong with elimination of the teaching of contrary theories of how man and life were created think about what a strict teaching of evolution can bring when you reduce life to just an accidental occurrence no more special or different than any other animal. Consider the statement of an avid evolutionist.

Sofa then says " Sorry, Hen, but we can civilly disagree on democrat and republican, hot versus cold, blonde versus brunette and fat versus skinny. But when you passionately insist that the earth is flat and "flat out" refuse to look at the evidence that it is spherical, I'm sorry but you got it coming to you. "

Again, nothing justifies attacking a fellow forum member demeaning their intelligence and gives a license to act uncivil toward others that disagree with you no matter what their statements, or beliefs are. But then, when you consider man just a chance occurrence, a mistake of chance, then it's very easy not to attach any special significance to life or to another individual so it's easy then to consider them as an object rather than a person deserving of mutual respect. It is easier then to condone abortion, genocide or the elimination of any class of group of people that are not as "enlightened" as the select gifted. Lets just eliminate those that are not as enlightened that are a "danger" to all those of "us" who are intellectual and superior account of our special gifted knowledge and ability to comprehend.

You, or those like you, suggest it's dangerous to allow the teaching of Creation to the young or as a counter point of view as to the vehicle by which we got here. I suggest to you that you are a shining example of just what teaching evolution alone and strict adherence to evolution brings you. It brings you people who can disregard others with no conscience at all considering them not worthy of mutual respect or value. When life is not considered as significant and special then that IS truly dangerous and can, and does, lead to a very dangerous state.

And no I know you didn't say you approve of genocide or elimination of people, yet your example of stating ""I'm sorry but you got it coming" indicates there is justification, in your mind, for actions that are considered offensive or contrary to being civil toward people who disagree with you or have a certain opinion. What other qualifications shall you add to that list that warrants being considered sub-human? It isn't a far step further down that line to see how such horrific actions can be condoned without remorse or concern. Then though you would have your GODLESS Utopia.
[quoteBilly Joe]Interested in a challenge? Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/user/Ar...F002CC/0/KnJX68ELbAY Watch 'em all, they get into scientific detail as they go along.[/quote]


Billy joe,

I’m truly at a loss for words.

I watched the first 15 of your you tube clips.

I feel genuine pity that your intelligence has reached no farther than this offering as science.

You apparently don’t know your a55 from a hole in the ground about evolution.

Please don’t expose yourself as ignorant. You have followers on here that hang on your every word like jank, nagel, sofa and others.

I suggest you read everything you can get your hands on that relate to the Human Genome Project if you are on a journey to the truth in biology..

This fair of videos are no more than comic book-Dick and Jane.

I cannot believe a group intentionally sat down and compiled this stupidity and assumed the public would swallow it as science.

I think we are dealing with the confused whose mentality is at a point, after which, lies the truth.

Be well.
GK.

with just a quick look at your original post again, I counted 12 times that you used the word "god" or "christian"

So tell me again how you did not bring religion into your discussion of the scientific facts presented in evolution?

Oh yeah, and you posted it in a religion forum. Yeah I can see how we all completely misunderstood your misgivings about evolution. Roll Eyes

Once again. Creationism IS a religious belief. Not science. There are less than 5 percent of scientist in the US that believe in creationism. Of those less than 0.015 percent are of the life sciences. The US has the most scientist that believe in creationism in the world. So what does that tell you? I can tell you that it mean that even less than that in the rest of the civilized world believe it to be anything but religious based. Not science.

These individuals that have gone to school for many many years and dedicated their lives to science have a much better understanding of evolution than you or I. If I have chest pains I am not going to ask the boy who bags my groceries to diagnose me, I am going to a certified Dr. How bout you? Are you telling me and others here that because you can't understand the science behind evolution then you just don't buy it? Would you say that you know more about this subject than these very learned and accredited scientist?

Go HERE to see a list of scientific organazations that support evolution as good science vs. creationism. NCSE is one of the most revered science organizations in the world. They have no reason to lie to anyone nor do they want to. They are true scientist that are only in search of the truth.

I'm not calling you stupid, or any name at all other than maybe stubborn. Smiler You don't have to believe that everything you see today came from a common ancestor and then evolved to what we are and see today. To tell you the truth I could really care less if you believe in evolution. When it come to teaching religious beliefs in public school to children THEN I have a problem with your beliefs.

I have seen some really good information sent your way by Sofa and BJBG and you refuse to accept it. There is nothing I can say I am sure that will change your mind either.

I will ask one more time for you to present your scientific evidence to support creationism for review. If it were truly science then it would be taught in schools all across the country. Using the bible as proof is not evidence. You have said this isn't about religion yet you are willing to completely disregard all scientific evidence presented to you in exchange for something that has absolutely NO scientific evidence to back it up. I sincerely don't understand. If it is just a few things, that doesn't make sense to you about the science of evolution, that causes you to disbelieve its validity how can you so whole heartedly believe something that has no scientific evidence at all in its favor?

I am not trying to argue with you. I am really trying to understand your point of view. I just can't seem to make sense of what you are saying. Why do you distrust those that have dedicated their lives to learning and understanding the nature of evolution? Why do you so steadfastly believe that it is some kind of conspiracy that is being carried out all over the scientific world?

I would also like to say that as an atheist you have been more than just a little insulting in your comments towards me and others like me. So when you say that Sofa and BJBG are being insulting to you, I suggest you go back and look at some of the things you have said about atheist as a whole. I am not immoral and I do care quite deeply about my fellow human beings. I want this world to be the best it can be for my children and my grand children. I want REAL science at work discovering new and better treatments and cures to help ease the suffering of so many. Learning more about evolution and advances in the studies of the gnome will go a long way in doing that.

Creationism does not and can not do any of those things.
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
GK.

with just a quick look at your original post again, I counted 12 times that you used the word "god" or "christian"

So tell me again how you did not bring religion into your discussion of the scientific facts presented in evolution?

Oh yeah, and you posted it in a religion forum. Yeah I can see how we all completely misunderstood your misgivings about evolution. Roll Eyes


Now here is a copy and paste from an earlier post which I responded to:
" GBRK said, "my objections were not based upon or in Religion or using Religious arguments." GB, You are being disingenuous, sir. You and everyone else here knows that your objections are based on the literal account of Genesis and the fact that Evolution disagrees with the bible. The premise you support, Creationism and ID, are purely RELIGIOUS ideas that have no basis in science. This is the kind of goofyness that drives young educated people away from our faith. You are doing no service for our faith by pretending this is not a religious issue. "

I do not believe I ever stated that I didn't inject religion into a topic or this thread for you are trying, like others, to skew what I really said and misdirect things to indicate I was being untruthful. R E A D C A R E F U L L Y. I said MY OBJECTION TO EVOLUTION was not based in Religion or my religious beliefs. If I thought evolution was factual, if I felt you or the others had a valid point and argument regarding it (even a unique or original one would be nice .. seems all we get is what Dawkins said or another evolutionist has to make your statements for you via youtube) back to my point .. .if I felt you or the others proved to me without a doubt evolution was the vehicle that got life here and I honestly believed it then I would believe fully that GOD engineered evolution to do so. AGAIN I said and stated MY
OBJECTION TO EVOLUTION IS, WAS, AND IS NOT BASED IN RELIGION OR DID I INJECT RELIGION BY STATING MY OBJECTIONS TO EVOLUTION. Did I talk about Creation, God, Religion or Religious matters .. YES and will but the question and accusation that I denied from the beginning was that MY OBJECTION was not based in Religion or motivated by my religious beliefs. It was solely based upon my observations of lack of living, existing, observable incremental species/specimens verifying the existence of Evolution. You can't use the argument that we are all continuing to evolve as IF evolution was real and factual ALL STAGES of Evolution would be living, alive, breathing, existing today and not just the finished (to this point) stage existing alongside the beginning state and the jump made with everything dying out in-between.

I also didn't discuss the scientific facts presented in evolution as they don't exist. What does exist are examples of fossils that scientist attempt to piece together to make their stories jive and look like they have some validity and they do well enough to fool enough who are willing to overlook the glaring discrepancies associated with the theory of evolution.

Hey believe as you wish, you are correct I have not altered my beliefs or positions. I also have yet to get a retraction from any of you who skewed my words and statements. I don't believe I ever said I never injected religion into a discussion but rather that my argument and objection against evolution was not religiously based.

I do appreciate you remaining civil about it and while I may be stubborn that same description applies to each of those exposing evolution on here regarding your arguments and positions.

Eliminating creation from being taught because it is teaching religion or a religion is also foolish and the only straw you folks can draw upon in order to eliminate any opposition. Control the field of ideas and restrict any opposition and your followers will certainly grow in numbers and your argument will seem to be legit.

Creation/Intelligent design deserves to be taught alongside evolution as a competing theory for there are millions who fully believe in a divine Creator and have. No specific God has to be mentioned but it deserves to be taught to children as they encounter evolution that there are many who believe that a divine creator was responsible for the order of things and that life is a part of that creation or that millions believe that life was created from an Intelligent source beyond what science has the capability to define or measure. It is as simple as that but evolutionist and scientist, or most, cannot stand that there is a competing theory to their own so they banish any possible mention of it.

Had Darwin failed in his efforts to win at the Decatur, TN trial and religion still controlled the field of ideas as it did for many years then each of you would be crying foul. What hypocrisy, what intellectual cowardliness to use every tool to eliminate competing ideas or theories.

You ask for scientific evidence and I've spent a very long time explaining in detail to deep .., sorry, NSNS that Creation teaches that what was created was done from the Spiritual Realm and brought about the Physical and that Science cannot measure, touch, or will not Recognize the Spiritual so what you ask to prove is an impossibility. That said YOU CANNOT disprove a Spiritual Realm using science either. It's the same as a thought or a memory .. you can't touch them or see them yet they exist within the areas of your brain which is tangible and that you can measure or touch. Just like a persons emotions, memories and ideas they spring from the Physical matter of the mind and to each person with them they know they exist. It's the same way with the Spiritual realm .. It most certainly exist apart from the Physical but without you being able to experience it and touch it or feel it you will continue to live refusing to believe it exist. That is to your own detriment.

While you are at it .. since my objection to evolution based upon missing incremental transitional species and beings was never adequately answered lets try another one.

Consider Reproduction and Birth .. Male & Female .. where do and how do these fit nicely into your evolving from a single common denominator or primordial soup to multiply and divide etc.

How do you fit language, intelligence, communication in your evolutionary process and what about death .. the dying body is certainly not evolving or getting better through time but it's dying.

What about the vastly different types of life .. aquatic, mammals, insects, plants, other things that are alive, living yet vastly different yet appearing all over the earth together?

Likewise if Evolution was factual there would be far more creatures/beings/life forms existing today that were hybrids of one species to another .. part plant/part amphibian/part mammal / part bird and various transitional states from species to species so there would be vastly more profoundly weird forms of life and that fails to consider the microlife that exist on the planet.


I don't have one objection or problem with Evolution I have many which I find revealing regarding evolution not being the vehicle that got us here and NONE of the above mentioned rely upon Religion or being a Christian either. So if any of you have original thought or are so well versed in Evolution lets here your counter to the above questions.
Last edited by gbrk
See my post above yours as I edited it to present some more problems I feel evolution has to confront and answer in order to be considered valid. See the part after my statement "While you are at it" toward the bottom of my novel.

And still no retraction of the allegations made toward me regarding my objections being said to be religiously based. In fact my denominational affiliation does a very poor job when it comes to debating and discussing evolution and bases all objections from a religious viewpoint, out of religion.
I see I'm getting nowhere in that wise. Too vague.

OK, gb, answer me this: Older geological layers yield more primitive or transitional fossils of modern forms of plants and animals. The older the strata, the more primitive, or tellingly transitional, the fossils emerge.

For example, ancient fossils of modern whales are reasonably well preserved in the fossil record. The oldest recognizable fossils of cetaceans represent land-based animals. Further fossils, linked without doubt, show the transitions to a water-based mammal.

Every bone shows transition. Every gradual movement of the nostrils from the front of the head to the top is evidence of natural selection. Heck, the fact that whales are mammals should be enough to convince you that evolution is the only answer to that question.

Sorry, mate. Only evolution explains the diversity of life on Earth. Not even the God of the Old Testament could have conceived of anything so elegant and demonstrable.

nsns
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
quote:


I do not believe I ever stated that I didn't inject religion into a topic or this thread for you are trying, like others, to skew what I really said and misdirect things to indicate I was being untruthful. R E A D C A R E F U L L Y. I said MY OBJECTION TO EVOLUTION was not based in Religion or my religious beliefs. If I thought evolution was factual, if I felt you or the others had a valid point and argument regarding it (even a unique or original one would be nice .. seems all we get is what Dawkins said or another evolutionist has to make your statements for you via youtube) back to my point .. .if I felt you or the others proved to me without a doubt evolution was the vehicle that got life here and I honestly believed it then I would believe fully that GOD engineered evolution to do so. AGAIN I said and stated MY
OBJECTION TO EVOLUTION IS, WAS, AND IS NOT BASED IN RELIGION OR DID I INJECT RELIGION BY STATING MY OBJECTIONS TO EVOLUTION. Did I talk about Creation, God, Religion or Religious matters .. YES and will but the question and accusation that I denied from the beginning was that MY OBJECTION was not based in Religion or motivated by my religious beliefs.


Ok, I understand now. I think. Your objection to evolution is not based in religion or facts. Its just not what you believe to be true.

]quote] It was solely based upon my observations of lack of living, existing, observable incremental species/specimens verifying the existence of Evolution. You can't use the argument that we are all continuing to evolve as IF evolution was real and factual ALL STAGES of Evolution would be living, alive, breathing, existing today and not just the finished (to this point) stage existing alongside the beginning state and the jump made with everything dying out in-between.


I swear to you that I am not trying to be rude or insulting when I say that you don't know what your talking about. Of course all stages of human evolution do not live at the same time in the same environment. To say this is to not understand at all what evolution is about. What you are asking for is just not feasible and would be something entirely different from evolution.

quote:
I also didn't discuss the scientific facts presented in evolution as they don't exist. What does exist are examples of fossils that scientist attempt to piece together to make their stories jive and look like they have some validity and they do well enough to fool enough who are willing to overlook the glaring discrepancies associated with the theory of evolution.


Here is where you really confuse me. As I ask before, do you really honestly believe that the scientist have for more than 150 years been perpetuating a huge conspiracy? To what end? Why and how could they do this? Any new verifiable scientific discovery regarding life origins would be a feather in the cap of any scientist. Why would they want to mislead the whole world?



quote:
Creation/Intelligent design deserves to be taught alongside evolution as a competing theory for there are millions who fully believe in a divine Creator and have.


Why does it deserve to be taught alongside science? A scientific theory is not the same as an idea or belief. It is your right to believe in a creator, that is for sure. It should be taught to your children at home and in church. Religion is a personal choice, not a science.

quote:
No specific God has to be mentioned but it deserves to be taught to children as they encounter evolution that there are many who believe that a divine creator was responsible for the order of things and that life is a part of that creation


Once again that is what church is for. No one is trying to stop any one from teaching their children about their religious beliefs. However it does not belong in a science class.

quote:
or that millions believe that life was created from an Intelligent source beyond what science has the capability to define or measure.


I know of a few ID beliefs out there. How bout we teach them about beings from other planets coming here and starting a new world? How is that one? Would you want your children to be taught that as a REAL possibility? Another one that is growing in popularity is the idea that some future human has created a SIMS type game and that we all just exist with in a computer program. There is a real possibility that one could happen in the next 100 years or less. Computers being what they are today, imagine the capabilities in the future. Should we teach that too?
quote:
It is as simple as that but evolutionist and scientist, or most, cannot stand that there is a competing theory to their own so they banish any possible mention of it.


See that is where we will definitely have to disagree. As of today in the year 2010 there are no competing theories to evolution. Remember that a scientific theory is different than an idea or belief. Not to sound like I am saying you are ignorant, but you should look that up.

quote:
Had Darwin failed in his efforts to win at the Decatur, TN trial and religion still controlled the field of ideas as it did for many years then each of you would be crying foul. What hypocrisy, what intellectual cowardliness to use every tool to eliminate competing ideas or theories.


Are you talking about the Scopes trial? In Dayton? Darwin was not there. He was long dead.

quote:
Creation teaches that what was created was done from the Spiritual Realm and brought about the Physical and that Science cannot measure, touch, or will not Recognize the Spiritual so what you ask to prove is an impossibility. That said YOU CANNOT disprove a Spiritual Realm using science either.


Gk, you have answered your own question about why creationism is not taught in science class along side of evolution. It is NOT science.


quote:
Consider Reproduction and Birth .. Male & Female .. where do and how do these fit nicely into your evolving from a single common denominator or primordial soup to multiply and divide etc.


I have no idea what you are asking here.

quote:
How do you fit language, intelligence, communication in your evolutionary process and what about death .. the dying body is certainly not evolving or getting better through time but it's dying.


Once again I am not sure I understand what you are asking here? Without language/communication we would not be the intelligent beings we are today. Are you asking how language evolved? As far as dying goes...well that is just part of life. Nothing lives forever. I can tell you that we live longer than our ancestors due to evolution. If that is what you are asking.

quote:
What about the vastly different types of life .. aquatic, mammals, insects, plants, other things that are alive, living yet vastly different yet appearing all over the earth together?


What about them?

quote:
Likewise if Evolution was factual there would be far more creatures/beings/life forms existing today that were hybrids of one species to another .. part plant/part amphibian/part mammal / part bird and various transitional states from species to species so there would be vastly more profoundly weird forms of life and that fails to consider the microlife that exist on the planet.


No there would not. However if a platypus doesn't fit your bill as a profoundly weird life form, then I don't know what would. Smiler
GK,

I have re-read this entire thread. Well, because I have insomnia tonight and I have nothing better to do. Smiler

Since you don't believe what trained, educated scientist have to say about evolution. And you won't accept fossil evidence. And you think that there is some kind of conspiracy to fool people into believing in evolution, I don't think you are ever going to see the truth of this matter.

I believe that you are smart enough to understand the information given to you. I just don't think you want to believe any of it. So I think we are at a stand still with this discussion.

I wish we could go on, but with all the stumbling blocks you have put forward, there is no way to prove to you that evolution is valid. You have ask for proof and you have been given references that would answer your questions, but you say they are a not true, so....I just don't see how this can proceed.

Good luck with your search for answers. I think you will have to at some point concede that 99 % of scientist are not lying to you before you can get those answers.
[quote Jank]I wish we could go on, but with all the stumbling blocks you have put forward, there is no way to prove to you that evolution is valid. You have ask for proof and you have been given references that would answer your questions, but you say they are a not true, so....I just don't see how this can proceed.[/quote]


Thanks jank,

I’ll see that you are nominated to share the Darwin Award with Billy Joe.
quote:
Ok, I understand now. I think. Your objection to evolution is not based in religion or facts. Its just not what you believe to be true.


First, True my objection is not religiously based or out of my religious beliefs.
Second, you are wrong as it is based in facts. It is factual that there are no existing, living, breathing transitional beings in their various states of transition within a species or from one to another. The sum of the links provided or statements provided by evolutionist may be enough to satisfy and convince you and them but it remains far insufficient to be convincing. Everyone wants to point to fossils dug up through the years and string them together yet if evolution is factual and real it is happening and happening all over again today in our time. Not the gradual transition of our current advanced species but starting all over again from the primordial soup whose elements still exist today along with the positive environment for their transitioning if such was happening. Monkeys would still be changing into more advanced creatures on their way to being man .. you would see creatures that were 10% monkey 90% man all the way through the incremental spectrum to 90% monkey 10% man. The very same process that you and others state happened over time eons ago would still be playing out for us to see in various remote parts of he earth, IF evolution was true.

You want to play connect the skeletons and fossils from the past which is much easier to manipulate when you claim that ALL have become extinct. The elements and environment still exist for recreation of these extinct species IF evolution was true and factual as you and other state.

Simply put you put your faith (faith in it being true .. not spiritual faith) in science and scientist to provide your answers for you about how every little thing happened and feel warm and fuzzy that you have achieved this heightened level of understanding. Science can but understand and comprehend the physical with no regard for the Spiritual realm the very place where I believe and rely upon that all creation came and sprang from.
quote:
I swear to you that I am not trying to be rude or insulting when I say that you don't know what your talking about. Of course all stages of human evolution do not live at the same time in the same environment. To say this is to not understand at all what evolution is about. What you are asking for is just not feasible and would be something entirely different from evolution.


OH? How so? Evolution, as I understand it as you and others put forth is an "unintelligent" process that evolves from the most absolute basic .. a happenstance event that just happened from the primordial soup when certain elements got together and with a beneficial environment to allow it and through natural selection and other processes life, all life, all species, all forms of life, evolved out of this pool into all the different advanced states we see and observe today. The very same elements exist in parts of the world to allow the same processes to happen over and over and over again and each year time starts over again for some elements and species as it continues for others but all along the spectrum should be here and visible and living out their existence in their happy way of evolving. Makes no sense that the intelligent process just decides it's complete and stops or only advances from an advanced state as the primitive states still exist .. what they don't want to better themselves and natural selection isn't still happening?

You are right about one thing ... it's useless to continue to go in the same circles that we are for we just rehash over and over and over again the same things. So I'll post one more post and present a new question to you.
quote:
Since you don't believe what trained, educated scientist have to say about evolution. And you won't accept fossil evidence. And you think that there is some kind of conspiracy to fool people into believing in evolution, I don't think you are ever going to see the truth of this matter.


Essentially you are saying I don't believe what trained educated scientist have to say. You omitted the word biased, which applies with many of them and atheistic which also applies meaning that NOT ALL aspects of the argument or not all possible vehicles or ways are considered for some are discounted from the beginning because of their lack of belief and their lack of understanding due to their closed minds with relation to Spiritual matters or the Spiritual Realm which these same educated scientist refuse to acknowledge could and does exist.

Now the new direction, the new question for you and/or your other atheistic, scientific brethren.

The human mind/brain is a material thing. It can be held, seen, touched, analyzed, categorized, cut open, operated on, and dissected and is a physical entity within the human body, of this there should be no argument. You claim to be scientific minded or rely upon science to provide your answers and if Science cannot or will not do that then it is irrelevant, doesn't exist or is a figment of someone's imagination ... or they are delusional thinking they know but only confusing themselves.

Given sciences abilities demonstrate, find, categorize, show or scientifically explain and provide evidence of "thoughts", LOVE, Emotions, ideas, feelings, dreams, fear, any or all of the above ? Measure each with science and prove, beyond doubt, that each EXIST and is real. Explain each in physical scientific terms, EVIDENCE, if you will, that, without any shred of doubt, will convince everyone that they exist and are real. If you cannot provide physical demonstrative evidence of each then it must not exist, right? USE EXACTLY the same criteria and requirements you are doing with Evolution and the acceptance of evolution as the vehicle by which we all got here. You say the evidence is overwhelming and there for all to SEE. Prove the above exist with the same criteria, scientifically, using science.


You claim Science has the dogmatic answer to the question and process by which all of Life arrived and got here so surely something as simple as this should be much easier to show and prove since we are talking about the hear and now without the need of fossils.

Prove also to me and the rest of the forum, using science great capabilities that dreams, thoughts, ideas, love, hate, fear existed in our ancestors.

That's two exercises for you and your other fellow scientific brethren to demonstrate. One answers for the present the other the past.

Heck evolution is so easy to prove these exercises surely should take far less time and be so awe inspiring.
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
quote:
I swear to you that I am not trying to be rude or insulting when I say that you don't know what your talking about. Of course all stages of human evolution do not live at the same time in the same environment. To say this is to not understand at all what evolution is about. What you are asking for is just not feasible and would be something entirely different from evolution.


OH? How so? Evolution, as I understand it as you and others put forth is an "unintelligent" process that evolves from the most absolute basic .. a happenstance event that just happened from the primordial soup when certain elements got together and with a beneficial environment to allow it and through natural selection and other processes life, all life, all species, all forms of life, evolved out of this pool into all the different advanced states we see and observe today. The very same elements exist in parts of the world to allow the same processes to happen over and over and over again and each year time starts over again for some elements and species as it continues for others but all along the spectrum should be here and visible and living out their existence in their happy way of evolving. Makes no sense that the intelligent process just decides it's complete and stops or only advances from an advanced state as the primitive states still exist .. what they don't want to better themselves and natural selection isn't still happening?


So do you expect to see Neanderthal man still walking around? You just keep throwing out outlandish statements that make no sense. Look into the Elephant tusks study. They are much shorter now than in generations before. Due to the hunting practices of humans. Humans are taller on average than we once were. These are examples of evolution.

quote:
You are right about one thing ... it's useless to continue to go in the same circles that we are for we just rehash over and over and over again the same things. So I'll post one more post and present a new question to you.


So just like that you are not going to answer any of my questions of you. You want others on here to spoon feed you information that is out there for anyone to obtain, yet when we do you dismiss it as false without anything to back up your presumptions. Now you want to move on to more of your own questions. What is the point? You don't want answers at all if you did then you would already have a better understanding of what you are talking about. If you had a true desire to know these things you would have educated yourself on the subject.
I think I will pass on your little exercise. I am sure that anything I produced as scientific research into these subjects would be dismissed as false unless they came from a christian based study.

Since you don't trust scientist, because you believe that there non belief in dieties blinds them to the truth, I can't see where anyone could prove ANYTHING scientific to you.

When you want to have a real discussion I would be glad to join you. Until then I suggest a visit to the library.
quote:
the Spiritual Realm which these same educated scientist refuse to acknowledge could and does exist.


Which spiritual realm is that?

The one for which there is no evidence? The one that is different for each person? The one that is so vague and ephemeral that people strap on bomb vests and blow up themselves and children over subtle differences within it?

Of course real scientists put aside the spiritual realm when they're doing science. Science is about demonstrable truth. Subjective, unsupportable spirituality would ruin it utterly.

I suspect that is what you'd like. You'd like it if science was all rejected, because of its material nature, and because it so often gives Yes or No answers. In the gray fog of the spiritual realm there are no concrete answers, everyone can invent and defend their own private little heavens and because it's all made up, no one can say they're wrong.

If you're satisfied with Creationist wackobabble (thanks, RP) then go with it. The rest of us will march along, making progress, learning more and more about reality while you are listening to your imaginary friend. Do us a favor and don't poison childrens' innocent minds with your Medievalism, OK?
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
I think I will pass on your little exercise. I am sure that anything I produced as scientific research into these subjects would be dismissed as false unless they came from a christian based study.

Since you don't trust scientist, because you believe that there non belief in dieties blinds them to the truth, I can't see where anyone could prove ANYTHING scientific to you.

When you want to have a real discussion I would be glad to join you. Until then I suggest a visit to the library.


She weeps in order to lure her prey with crocodile tears.
quote:
along the spectrum should be here and visible and living out their existence in their happy way of evolving.



GB, did you read my point about the polar bears disappearing while their counterparts down south, the black, brown and grisly bear thrive?

Does that shed any light whatsoever for explaining how some species do not survive while others do?

Just curious.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
along the spectrum should be here and visible and living out their existence in their happy way of evolving.



GB, did you read my point about the polar bears disappearing while their counterparts down south, the black, brown and grisly bear thrive?

Does that shed any light whatsoever for explaining how some species do not survive while others do?

Just curious.


Actually in all the post I don't remember that one so no I didn't read it apparently.
quote:
The human mind/brain is a material thing. It can be held, seen, touched, analyzed, categorized, cut open, operated on, and dissected and is a physical entity within the human body, of this there should be no argument. You claim to be scientific minded or rely upon science to provide your answers and if Science cannot or will not do that then it is irrelevant, doesn't exist or is a figment of someone's imagination ... or they are delusional thinking they know but only confusing themselves. Given sciences abilities demonstrate, find, categorize, show or scientifically explain and provide evidence of "thoughts", LOVE, Emotions, ideas, feelings, dreams, fear, any or all of the above ? Measure each with science and prove, beyond doubt, that each EXIST and is real. Explain each in physical scientific terms, EVIDENCE, if you will, that, without any shred of doubt, will convince everyone that they exist and are real. If you cannot provide physical demonstrative evidence of each then it must not exist, right? USE EXACTLY the same criteria and requirements you are doing with Evolution and the acceptance of evolution as the vehicle by which we all got here. You say the evidence is overwhelming and there for all to SEE. Prove the above exist with the same criteria, scientifically, using science.



The above, as the question ask before, to you who hold Science as the know all prove all and do all and the place to look for the answers. I find it amazing how fast though it seems that Jank has seemingly withdrawn.

What no takers among the scientific minds here on the board? And I thought it was a reasonable request as well as an interesting one or could this little exercise yield no concrete answers? No Scientific evidence or Proof for everyone to analyze?

I guess then none of the above REALLY EXIST. Surely this "fundie" hasn't given our scientific minds Pause?
Gb,
If I might.

There is a problem.

Idiot dawkins with his personal agenda against religion is losing credibility among a group of loud mouths that have tried ridicule as their main scientific tool.

The scientific community has listened to these bone heads espouse rhetoric in the name of science.

Dawkins has been quietly removed from his position as explainer of science to the public.lol

The word is out to the atheist community to sit down and shut up until their mess can be un-tangled.

Religion and it’s importance to mankind is being discussed behind atheist doors.

Billyjbgene, slim softa nagel and others have had their head so far up dawkins ass they haven’t heard the bugle call to retreat and regroup.

Like jank, they will disappear one by one with some lame excuse.

Dawkins and hitchens both have diseased brains which have affected many who follow them ironically by cultural evolution. Dawkins and hitchens have been reduced to a pair of angry non-rational book-ends.

Stay tuned.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
along the spectrum should be here and visible and living out their existence in their happy way of evolving.



GB, did you read my point about the polar bears disappearing while their counterparts down south, the black, brown and grisly bear thrive?

Does that shed any light whatsoever for explaining how some species do not survive while others do?

Just curious.


sofer

I'm not denying your claim but what do you have to back up the bears story?
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
along the spectrum should be here and visible and living out their existence in their happy way of evolving.



GB, did you read my point about the polar bears disappearing while their counterparts down south, the black, brown and grisly bear thrive?

Does that shed any light whatsoever for explaining how some species do not survive while others do?

Just curious.


Actually in all the post I don't remember that one so no I didn't read it apparently.


Well, now that you've read it, would you care to address it?
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
quote:
The human mind/brain is a material thing. It can be held, seen, touched, analyzed, categorized, cut open, operated on, and dissected and is a physical entity within the human body, of this there should be no argument. You claim to be scientific minded or rely upon science to provide your answers and if Science cannot or will not do that then it is irrelevant, doesn't exist or is a figment of someone's imagination ... or they are delusional thinking they know but only confusing themselves. Given sciences abilities demonstrate, find, categorize, show or scientifically explain and provide evidence of "thoughts", LOVE, Emotions, ideas, feelings, dreams, fear, any or all of the above ? Measure each with science and prove, beyond doubt, that each EXIST and is real. Explain each in physical scientific terms, EVIDENCE, if you will, that, without any shred of doubt, will convince everyone that they exist and are real. If you cannot provide physical demonstrative evidence of each then it must not exist, right? USE EXACTLY the same criteria and requirements you are doing with Evolution and the acceptance of evolution as the vehicle by which we all got here. You say the evidence is overwhelming and there for all to SEE. Prove the above exist with the same criteria, scientifically, using science.



The above, as the question ask before, to you who hold Science as the know all prove all and do all and the place to look for the answers. I find it amazing how fast though it seems that Jank has seemingly withdrawn.

What no takers among the scientific minds here on the board? And I thought it was a reasonable request as well as an interesting one or could this little exercise yield no concrete answers? No Scientific evidence or Proof for everyone to analyze?

I guess then none of the above REALLY EXIST. Surely this "fundie" hasn't given our scientific minds Pause?


Gb, are you familiar with the term "electrochemical reaction"? you need a pretty through understanding of that term to even hope to grasp the basics of the explanation of your rather elementary questions.
Sofa, the brain emits all kinds of electrical information that can be measured but that does not answer my questions or challenges to show, view, touch, aspects of physical science regarding what a thought is, an emotion such as fear or love, an idea or dream you electrical signals are a function of life itself and the whole of the body will produce them. I'm looking for you, or anyone of the other science based folks here, to scientifically show evidence that will analytically prove thoughts exist, fear, love exist ideas. What you are trying to do is take a reaction which can also mask any stimuli such as touch or feeling heat or cold. Sorry but that's no answer to my question. The key word in what you are trying to cite is REACTION but reaction to what? Scientifically prove what is causing this reaction using physical terms and properties. That is what I'm after.

Not ShallowNot Slim I have done this in an earlier post for Sofa on one of the earlier pages when he ask me to define it. I think for the moment that we have all presented our cases for and against evolution and argued or debated to a stalemate. You claim, justifiably so, that I don't except your evidence as sufficient to prove evolution as life's vehicle and the statements and youtube videos that have been produced or cited are said to more than prove evolution is true. Those who are following this thread are the ones to make up there minds for ours are firmly entrenched in what we believe with regards to Evolution. One stark difference, or so it seems with most of those arguing evolution is there is NO credit or possibility given that a Realm, other than the Physical, exist. A Spiritual Realm from where God resides and exercises His Power, a Spiritual Realm that although is not Physical and cannot be seen, touched or measured, yet from which produced all the physical world and universe along with Life itself. I realize that this is total gibberish and trash to y'all but to me it's valid enough to accept as a legitimate challenge to evolution as the vehicle by which all became rather than a "Big Bang" which led to life happening by mistake and happenstance just because certain elements or molecules got together in a favorable environment and from that union all life creatures and life elements sprang and evolved.

Now I'm waiting on sufficient evidence of thoughts, of dreams, of ideas and of Love, hate, and fear defined scientifically and presented in the same terms as evolution is proved to be factual by those of you with a scientific mindset.
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
Sofa, the brain emits all kinds of electrical information that can be measured but that does not answer my questions or challenges to show, view, touch, aspects of physical science regarding what a thought is, an emotion such as fear or love, an idea or dream you electrical signals are a function of life itself and the whole of the body will produce them. I'm looking for you, or anyone of the other science based folks here, to scientifically show evidence that will analytically prove thoughts exist, fear, love exist ideas. What you are trying to do is take a reaction which can also mask any stimuli such as touch or feeling heat or cold. Sorry but that's no answer to my question. The key word in what you are trying to cite is REACTION but reaction to what? Scientifically prove what is causing this reaction using physical terms and properties. That is what I'm after. Love, Hate, Thought, Ideas, Dreams .. the mind is a physical thing and science defines and analyzes the physical so have at it. Use the same criteria and methods you use for answering how life got here in answering my current challenge since it's so elementary.

Not ShallowNot Slim I have done this in an earlier post for Sofa on one of the earlier pages when he ask me to define it. I think for the moment that we have all presented our cases for and against evolution and argued or debated to a stalemate. You claim, justifiably so, that I don't except your evidence as sufficient to prove evolution as life's vehicle and the statements and youtube videos that have been produced or cited are said to more than prove evolution is true. Those who are following this thread are the ones to make up there minds for ours are firmly entrenched in what we believe with regards to Evolution. One stark difference, or so it seems with most of those arguing evolution is there is NO credit or possibility given that a Realm, other than the Physical, exist. A Spiritual Realm from where God resides and exercises His Power, a Spiritual Realm that although is not Physical and cannot be seen, touched or measured, yet from which produced all the physical world and universe along with Life itself. I realize that this is total gibberish and trash to y'all but to me it's valid enough to accept as a legitimate challenge to evolution as the vehicle by which all became rather than a "Big Bang" which led to life happening by mistake and happenstance just because certain elements or molecules got together in a favorable environment and from that union all life creatures and life elements sprang and evolved.

Now I'm waiting on sufficient evidence of thoughts, of dreams, of ideas and of Love, hate, and fear defined scientifically and presented in the same terms as evolution is proved to be factual by those of you with a scientific mindset.
Something else just occurred to me. OK, it occurred yesterday. Hey, I'm busy.

Creationists have to twist their minds into contortions of illogic to believe what Ken Ham and Phillip Johnson submit. It must take lots and lots of effort.

For chrissakes, it would be easier to learn something about biology than to torture logic and reason enough to embrace Creationism. At least, at the end of the exercise, one would be able to admit to an honest evaluation of the situation.

How much mental (offered generously by Yours Truly) effort must it take to believe that dinosaurs walked with humans, that only humans were Created especially when our genome is 99% similar to chimpanzees, that there really was a Great Flood when there would certainly be geological evidence of such so far unfound?

What leaps of ignorance are required to believe that we are not the result of evolved land based vertebrates, with four symmetrical limbs, a head with all of our sensory organs, and nostrils?

What effort it must take to believe that God endowed us with the same endogenous retroviruses as our Chimp cousins! Especially when evolution explains it so elegantly.

Honestly, evolution explains life so neatly. So effortlessly. So purely. So satisfactorily. To deny it takes more work than to accept it. Denying truth is always hard work.

Deny away, Creationists. Truth is like the watercourse, it will find it's home. Evolution is the truth. Creationism is a lie.

The truth will win out, eventually. It seems we're still stuck with pre-Enlightenment sentiment in the South, with the resultant economy and intellectual results that should be expected of such.

Thank god, so to speak, that there are exceptions. Those brave souls who risk the .38 in the back, the social ostracizing, the missed business opportunities. They offer more than they miss. OK, maybe not with the .38.

It's over. Creationism fails. Google the Dover v Board case.

ID fails. It's Creationism in a lab coat. It's in all fashions dishonest.

Wise up. Or remain oppressed by your own ignorance.

nsns
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
quote:
The human mind/brain is a material thing. It can be held, seen, touched, analyzed, categorized, cut open, operated on, and dissected and is a physical entity within the human body, of this there should be no argument. You claim to be scientific minded or rely upon science to provide your answers and if Science cannot or will not do that then it is irrelevant, doesn't exist or is a figment of someone's imagination ... or they are delusional thinking they know but only confusing themselves. Given sciences abilities demonstrate, find, categorize, show or scientifically explain and provide evidence of "thoughts", LOVE, Emotions, ideas, feelings, dreams, fear, any or all of the above ? Measure each with science and prove, beyond doubt, that each EXIST and is real. Explain each in physical scientific terms, EVIDENCE, if you will, that, without any shred of doubt, will convince everyone that they exist and are real. If you cannot provide physical demonstrative evidence of each then it must not exist, right? USE EXACTLY the same criteria and requirements you are doing with Evolution and the acceptance of evolution as the vehicle by which we all got here. You say the evidence is overwhelming and there for all to SEE. Prove the above exist with the same criteria, scientifically, using science.



The above, as the question ask before, to you who hold Science as the know all prove all and do all and the place to look for the answers. I find it amazing how fast though it seems that Jank has seemingly withdrawn.

What no takers among the scientific minds here on the board? And I thought it was a reasonable request as well as an interesting one or could this little exercise yield no concrete answers? No Scientific evidence or Proof for everyone to analyze?

I guess then none of the above REALLY EXIST. Surely this "fundie" hasn't given our scientific minds Pause?


Gb, are you familiar with the term "electrochemical reaction"? you need a pretty through understanding of that term to even hope to grasp the basics of the explanation of your rather elementary questions.


Sofa,

Let’s assume eeeeeverybody knows all about electrochemical reaction.

With that axiom you go on and answer “these simple questions”.

I’ll bet you can’t.
and you better not tell a lie. I'll catch you.
quote:
Now I'm waiting on sufficient evidence of thoughts, of dreams, of ideas and of Love, hate, and fear defined scientifically and presented in the same terms as evolution is proved to be factual by those of you with a scientific mindset.


Excellent point!

Let's explore it a bit.

Is art a science or is it more emotional? I'm a rather scientifically minded man, but hard as I tried, I have never been successful at art. Nor does looking at art evoke emotions in me the way it does artistically-minded people. Yes, some art affects me, but I will never write a book on the Mona Lisa or Guernica, as has been done.

I have a challenge for you, gb. You posit that humans are special. Made in the image of God, with special emotions, insights, abilities of the intellect and spirituality. Only we could be so sublime as to express our privileged station in art.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He7Ge7Sogrk

I cannot paint that well.

If, after seeing this, one thinks that our intelligence, our sensitivity to existence, our ability to abstract reality is unique.... one must think again.

We are special animals on Earth, no doubt, but animals nonetheless, and only enhanced in certain skills. We are the products of an easily understood evolutionary process, if we have the courage and normal intelligence to accept that.

Will this elephant enter heaven? Why not? She is talented, gentle, kind, and of a lower order of intelligence than we, but not by much. In that way, she's much like Creationists.

nsns
quote:
Originally posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
quote:
Now I'm waiting on sufficient evidence of thoughts, of dreams, of ideas and of Love, hate, and fear defined scientifically and presented in the same terms as evolution is proved to be factual by those of you with a scientific mindset.


Excellent point!

Let's explore it a bit.

Is art a science or is it more emotional? I'm a rather scientifically minded man, but hard as I tried, I have never been successful at art. Nor does looking at art evoke emotions in me the way it does artistically-minded people. Yes, some art affects me, but I will never write a book on the Mona Lisa or Guernica, as has been done.

I have a challenge for you, gb. You posit that humans are special. Made in the image of God, with special emotions, insights, abilities of the intellect and spirituality. Only we could be so sublime as to express our privileged station in art.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He7Ge7Sogrk

I cannot paint that well.

If, after seeing this, one thinks that our intelligence, our sensitivity to existence, our ability to abstract reality is unique.... one must think again.

We are special animals on Earth, no doubt, but animals nonetheless, and only enhanced in certain skills. We are the products of an easily understood evolutionary process, if we have the courage and normal intelligence to accept that.

Will this elephant enter heaven? Why not? She is talented, gentle, kind, and of a lower order of intelligence than we, but not by much. In that way, she's much like Creationists.

nsns


Failed ,
quote:
Originally posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
We are special animals on Earth, no doubt, but animals nonetheless, and only enhanced in certain skills. We are the products of an easily understood evolutionary process, if we have the courage and normal intelligence to accept that.

Hi Deep,

When it comes to atheists -- I guess I have to agree with you. I would guess that the old saying, "I'll be a monkey's uncle!" was coined by and for atheists.

But, for we Christian believers -- we can always know we were "created in His image" (Genesis 1:27).

So, I guess we can agree that you were created in the image of your god -- and we Christian believers were created in the image of our God.

We are far from perfect, we are "forgiven sinners" -- we might not be pretty -- but, He created us in His image -- not as a monkey, regardless of our current appearance.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • InGodsImage
GK

Look here

and here

and one more

Now will you answer some of my questions to you? I would really like to hear your argument for why creationism/ID deserves to be taught in school. Since you seem to think that there is not enough scientific evidence to support evolution, what evidence do you have for creationism or ID?

If you want a real discussion then you will answer these questions. If not then it is as I suspected and you are basing your whole anti-evolution stance on your religion.

I'm sure that you will say that this is still not good enough, but I thought I would give it a try and just see if you were sincere in your questions or if you are just talking out your A55.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×