Argument For Evolution

Off Topic
123

[quote]pushharder wrote:
DPH wrote:
fundamentalist believe that the creation story in the Bible is literally true…non-fundamentalists don’t…

No explanation here.
[/quote]

does that mean you understand my postition or that you think I haven’t given a suitable explanation?

if the later…fundamentalists believe that the creation story in the old testament to be literally true (i.e. everything was created in six days)…non-fundamentalists consider that the six days reference may not be an actual six days but an unknown length of time…

does that make sense?

science is a useful tool (I choose not to ignore scientific conclusions that don’t fit into my preconceived beliefs about reality)…I worship God…

[quote]
yes, I’m sure Jesus will be patting you on the back for your wife-swaping fun…

“If you might be losing an argument always divert the conversation and begin a personal offensive” [center]

OR[/center]

“While in retreat do not hesitate to hurl epithets over your shoulder”[center]

OR[/center]

“When one senses he is in an indefensible position immediately begin a counteroffensive that targets the enemy personally”.

  • From The Art of Internet War by Stun Zu.[/quote]

hmmm…kind of like you saying I worship science (you’re trying to not so subtly insult me with that statement)? because you can’t come up with a legitimate counter-argument? are you sensing that your position is indefensible?

…

non-evolution argument related:

I’m sure that you’ll have a brilliant explanation for Jesus why you choose to commit adultery over and over again…

hey, live your life as you see fit, but as a Christian, I hope you realize the consequences of your actions…you’re only forgiven the things that you’re truly repentant of (not continually repeated sins against God that you have no intention of admitting they are wrong)…

124

push: Maybe I can help.

If you take the bible not as literal word-for-word truth, and look at it as more similar to metaphor and poetry, then it can be easily reconciled with normal, non-supernatural life.

Why not use the bible as a colleciton of stories to help you guide yourself throughout your life? The fundamentalists treat the bible like it is a science textbook, although it is not. It is also not a perfectly historical account of reality. Guys don’t die and then come back to life after three days. No matter how cool they are. Also, leprosy isn’t cured by “laying on of hands”… it’s cured by antibiotics like Rifampin.

I think that the story of Easter is a beautiful story of one’s man search for acceptance and his eventual redemption through sacrifice. The main idea is one of the real power of selflessness, and its importance to all of us as one people. It does not mean that Jesus is the literal son of God. These are fables which use powerful archetypical figures as literary devices to drive home the theme of the story. If it was some guy named Melvin who smelled bad, it just wouldn’t work as good as if it was some miracle worker who gave of himself so that others could live. Look at the Wrath of Khan, for cryin’ out loud! Let’s visit the end of the movie, and the Engineering deck on the Enterprise, with the warp engines malfunctioning, and the entire crew endangered, Spock makes the decision that rescues everyone from a certain death.

Spock: “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one…”

Kirk: “Spock… no…”

Spock: “It is only… logical…”

What happens at the very end of the movie, and Spock’s casket is jettisoned from the ship to land at that Genesis planet which is being worked over by some weird new technology? He climbs out of the casket… alive.

Did Jesus have pointy ears? :slight_smile:

126

DPH: Ummm, how did this thread take on the issue of wife-swapping? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE??? LOL

Honestly, wife swapping can be fun if you do it right. There’s ways you can fuck your marriage all up if you are clumsy about it, though. Keep it cool, push! :slight_smile:

128

[quote]DPH wrote:
…you’re only forgiven the things that you’re truly repentant of (not continually repeated sins against God that you have no intention of admitting they are wrong)…

pushharder wrote:
Do you think this is this “literally true”? If so, a fundamentalist ye may indeed be!
[/quote]

And I want to go OT just once more to say that this post is a beautiful twist on the argument. Are you seeing the light, push? LOL

129

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Loth, this thread is not about all this creation stuff. It’s not about the Bible. You guys are bringing all this up. The thread is about evolution. Go back and re-read the first few posts. [/quote]

MMKay. What we are talking about here is that y’all have a problem with the origin of species through evolution not because of its inherent weakness as a theory, but because it clashes with your religious beliefs, just like the debate opponents the original poster wanted ammunition against.

Dude. Science class. Evolution of species is crazy-ass, mega-obvious, way-ultra-proven already. I hate to say this because it sounds condescending, but… duh.

What we are still trying to figure out is HOW exactly the species evolves. So far, we’ve figured out that there are several factors which lead to changes in populations over the millenia. This is backed up by observation of current species and experimentation with genetics in the lab.

Also, we have a fossil record that although incomplete, catalogues morphological changes in animal types over millions of years. We can see quite clearly that the amphibians branched off from the reptile family in the fossil record. That’s speciation through gradual adaption and mutation. There is no doubt about any of this, I’m sorry. It’s there.

But is this the only mechanism for evolution of species? Tough call. We are just scratching the surface of the discovery of the Archaea lifeforms – perhaps there is something different which goes on in these exotic lifeforms that is not readily apparent to us in Eukaryotic or Prokaryotic cell lines.

Feel better now? :slight_smile:

130

[quote]Franck wrote:
Evolution is a FACT, but the explanation of its mechanism (like darwinism…) is no more than a mere theory whom the arguments are not very convincing nowadays, and needs some major improvement…

Sorry for my french ;-)[/quote]

Oh, really? [i] A Fact? [/i]

Where’s the [i]proof? [/i]

The guy who said it is a [i]belief [/i] is being honest. You do have to believe in evolution, since it is a religious concept for atheists – trying to explain everything apart from the Divine.

The fact that there is no good cogent explanation for so-called evolution is because – IT NEVER HAPPEND!

Remember – were you there?

131

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Franck wrote:
Evolution is a FACT, but the explanation of its mechanism (like darwinism…) is no more than a mere theory whom the arguments are not very convincing nowadays, and needs some major improvement…

Sorry for my french :wink:

Oh, really? [i] A Fact? [/i]

Where’s the [i]proof? [/i]

The guy who said it is a [i]belief [/i] is being honest. You do have to believe in evolution, since it is a religious concept for atheists – trying to explain everything apart from the Divine.

The fact that there is no good cogent explanation for so-called evolution is because – IT NEVER HAPPEND!

Remember – were you there?

[/quote]

Once there was a guy named Darwin.

He wrote the origin of species. People did not like the implications. He himself did not like them.

Yet, experiments made by Mendel around the same time seem to support his theory .

Fossiles that were then found, seem to support this theory.

Genes, a concept unknown to Darwin, seem to support his theory.

The earth, which was believed to be much younger turns out to be several billion years old, leaving time for evolution, also supporting Darwins theory.

I could go on for a while there but why bother.

After Darwin wrote his book his "theory " was supported by real life evidence again and again and again.

Data that supports creationionism: Zero.

If you still want to believe in creationism, fine, if you also want to believe that ET and ID are on the same level, great…

Planck was right, people die, they take their ideas with them and the next generation wonders what all the fuzz was all about.

132

[quote]DPH wrote:
ConanSpeaks wrote:
You certainly know how to post an answer the problem is you’re not very bright when it comes to actually reading the posts you reply to. My original post was in the form of a question not a statement. If I had wanted to state an opinion I would have like I did in my last post where I stated “you smell like meat and cheese”.

you’re so full of shit…you are not looking for answers…you’re looking to discredit the theory of evolution with weak arguments…[/quote]

Once again I asked a question, I didn’t make a statement. At this point I can only assume hat english is a second language for you.

[quote]I am so glad that there are people like you in the world. Otherwise there would be no one to do the menial labors of the world like pick up garbage or wash my car. It’s obvious with your listening skills you probably couldn’t even get a counter job at McDonalds.

it’s reading skills…you read posts on the internet, not listen to them…

and besides, I make nearly eighty grand a year picking up your garbage…lol![/quote]

So you’re the guy who got my old golf clubs and that thighmaster I threw out!

[quote]Why do I continue to reply to these posts? Quite frankly I am fascinated by the belligerence and arrogance displayed by people such as yourself. Yes talking to someone like you is like going to the freak show at the carnival, I’m disgusted by what I see, but for some odd reason I can’t seem to look away.

you read and reply to posts here because you’re a nutjob just like the rest of the loonies here (me included)…you just haven’t admitted it to yourself yet…[/quote]

Touche’! On that note I will conceed that I have argued with you, although it wasn’t about evolution. Go have a beer on me this weekend and send me the bill.

133

How are we defining evolution? Are we defining it as simple adaptation or significant changes that would constitute a change of Genus and Species? Someone mentioned that there was a new version of ?The Theory of Evolution? than Darwin?s. I would be interested to read it. The statement that the fossil record supports Evolution requires more than just a statement. Can you provide an example of a specific fossil line that would map the changes between species? Before we can look to the fossil records to get any answers it still needs to be defined.

I don?t disagree that there are significant changes in animal and plant populations. This can be proven by the following examples:

  1. Hybrid plants (Mendel?s experiments)
  2. Hybrid animals (i.e. bog breeds)
  3. Human ethnicity and characteristics of each
  4. Physical abnormalities caused by in breeding or limited gene pool ( i.e. Isolated villages in Africa with ?Cleft Foot?
    I could go on. None of the preceding examples show changes that would point to a new species. I would not expect a scientific theory like this to stand the test of time. It should eventually give way to a newer and more accurate version of itself, much in the same way that Newtonian Physics gave way to Einstein?s. New scientific discoveries in Genetics and Chemistry will ultimately point to more complex components then DNA or the quark. The more we drill down to find the building blocks of our world we find another layer of complexity. Check out Modern synthesis - Wikipedia to find specific terms to search on. One term I would focus on and gets to the heart of the matter is Speciation. The danger of the ?Evolution? discussion is that most people think of Darwin and nothing more current, me included. This is why I consistently go back to a definition. I have yet to find anything that I would find substantial enough to accept Evolution as defined by Speciation as a fact.
    We discuss the changes of existing life, but not the beginning of life. Using the laws of physics, math and chemistry we cannot create or provide acceptable statistics on the creation, for lack of a better word, life. We still go back to you can?t get something out of nothing.

Me Solomon grundy

134

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
DPH: Ummm, how did this thread take on the issue of wife-swapping? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE??? LOL
[/quote]

well, the evolution gag is getting to be old news here at the big ‘T’ ranch…

it needs something to spice it up with…no one seems to be interested in running with that line of thought though…damnit!

136

[quote]DPH wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Do you think this is this “literally true”? If so, a fundamentalist ye may indeed be![/quote]

I’m open to the possibitity that I could be wrong about nearly everything that goes on in my head (I’ve never had my IQ tested but I wouldn’t doubt that it’s in sub-80’s)…

do you believe that Christianity is a ‘get out of jail free card’? are Christians free to sin all they want repeatedly with no remorse and no possibility of negative consequences?

what do you think?

137

[quote]ConanSpeaks wrote:
Once again I asked a question, I didn’t make a statement. At this point I can only assume hat english is a second language for you.
[/quote]

nope, wrong again…

I don’t have the mental acuity for two languages…I only partially understand a few select words of english…

the rest of my vocabulary consists of un-intelligable gibberish…

golf sucks, I threw that crap out…I kept the thighmaster though, to launch projectiles at my neighbors…thanks man!

[quote]
Touche’! On that note I will conceed that I have argued with you, although it wasn’t about evolution. Go have a beer on me this weekend and send me the bill.[/quote]

sorry, I can’t drink alcohol…if I did I’d probably wake up two weeks later in the out-skirts of Vegas married to one of those bunny-ranch hookers…

that would be bad (or would it?? hmmmmmm)…

139

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Such as rejecting what God directly inspired in the book of Genesis and laughing it off as allegorical? Scoffing at His Word? Belittling what He said very succinctly?
[/quote]

strange, I don’t recall laughing, scoffing, or belittling the Bible…

but, I do admit to thinking much of the Bible is a symbolic representation and not literal (I could be wrong)…

what do you think on this matter? you haven’t given an answer…

do you believe your habitual adultery (consequent bragging about it) and utter lack of remorse will be forgiven (not saying I know the answer to this, but what do you believe)?

[quote]
DPH, you dance well for a big guy.[/quote]

and you avoid answering questions like a seasoned politician…

140

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Also, we have a fossil record that although incomplete, catalogues morphological changes in animal types over millions of years. We can see quite clearly that the amphibians branched off from the reptile family in the fossil record. That’s speciation through gradual adaption and mutation. There is no doubt about any of this, I’m sorry. It’s there.
[/quote]

Remember that creationists, like push, believe that fossils are just weird stones created by satan.

It is useless to talk to any creationist, that is why I stopped posting as soon as I noticed I was being trolled by a creationist. You know, someone that refuses to open his eyes and see is worst than blind. (more on the subject: true-believer syndrome - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com )

I kept reading just because I want to stay informed regarding the logical fallacies and crazy arguments creationists use.

Finally, rational people “win” by default, because facts don’t care if people choose to ignore them.