06 Oct 05
1 edit
A note to all interested parties:
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent full of doubt.
AND
When the intensity of emotional conviction subsides, a man who is in the habit of reasoning will search for logical grounds in favor of the belief which he finds in himself.
Bertrand Russell (1872-1970, British philosopher, mathematician, essayist)
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
06 Oct 05
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage"And in man is a three-pound brain which, as far as we know, is the most complex and orderly arrangement of matter in the universe."
Wishful thinking would be for you to get a brain, plant-man.
Dr. Isaac Asimov (biochemist; was a Professor at Boston University School of Medicine; internationally known author), "In the game of energy and thermodynamics you can't even break even.". Smithsonian Institute Journal, June 1970, p. 10
06 Oct 05
3 edits
Originally posted by RatXYou continue to misunderstand the theory of evolution if you think it claims that "random chance and energy" are the driving force behind speciation. Any evolotuionist will agree that, while a necessary ingredient for natural selection (which is commonly but incorrectly misportrayed as a tautological explanation in the anti literature), random chance and energy is not sufficient for speciation.
However, the only way for something to become more complex, bigger and better, is through a highly controlled and intellligent process. Just take your own work for example - the only way you make anything succeed is through hard work and intelligence. Through random chance and energy, this doesn't happen - it's missing the vital ingredient of intelligence and design.
06 Oct 05
Originally posted by HalitoseInteresting. I've never heard of this Russell guy. He's a philosopher, you say? What do you suppose he meant by each of these quotes?
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent full of doubt.
AND
When the intensity of emotional conviction subsides, a man who is in the habit of reasoning will search for logical grounds in favor of the belief which he finds in himself.
Bertrand Russell (1872-1970, British philosopher, mathematician, essayist)
06 Oct 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesInteresting. I've never heard of this Russell guy.
Interesting. I've never heard of this Russell guy. He's a philosopher, you say? What do you suppose he meant by each of these quotes?
Mheh! 😛
What do you suppose he meant by each of these quotes?
The more you know, the more you realise how little you know.
AND
Selective evidence can be used to prove anything you like.
06 Oct 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThe stupid make mistakes and blame.....therefore have nothing to learn
Interesting. I've never heard of this Russell guy. He's a philosopher, you say? What do you suppose he meant by each of these quotes?
The intelligent.....make mistakes or doubt, take responsiblity and learn.
gil
just a though on the quote
06 Oct 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI'm not worried about speciation - I'm talking about the driving force that created life, from nothing... And then not only sustained it, but got it to reproduce. Backtrack a little, you seem to be ahead of yourself.
You continue to misunderstand the theory of evolution if you think it claims that "random chance and energy" are the driving force behind speciation. Any evolotuionist will agree that, while a necessary ingredient for natural selection (which is commonly but incorrectly misportrayed as a tautological explanation in the anti literature), random chance and energy is not sufficient for speciation.
06 Oct 05
Originally posted by RatXOh, so you have a fundamental disagreement with non-theistic accounts of the origin of life! You really threw me off there with all that superfluous jabber about evolution.
I'm not worried about speciation - I'm talking about the driving force that created life, from nothing... And then not only sustained it, but got it to reproduce. Backtrack a little, you seem to be ahead of yourself.
06 Oct 05
Originally posted by telerionI certainly do - my "superfluous jabber" was my experience and study of evolution and some of the areas where the theory didn't hold up (specifically, answering the questions on the purpose of life, free will and determining right and wrong)...
Oh, so you have a fundamental disagreement with non-theistic accounts of the origin of life! You really threw me off there with all that superfluous jabber about evolution.
I was simply pointing out some conclusions one would draw when looking at life if evolution somehow was true.
06 Oct 05
Originally posted by RatXAs has been pointed out over and over again in this thread (including in my first post albeit not directly), your specific criticisms have absolutely nothing to do with evolutionary theory.
I certainly do - my "superfluous jabber" was my experience and study of evolution and some of the areas where the theory didn't hold up (specifically, answering the questions on the purpose of life, free will and determining right and wrong)...
I was simply pointing out some conclusions one would draw when looking at life if evolution somehow was true.
That evolution has and continues to occur is just a fact of life that you'll have to either accept or deny. You can either alter your belief system to account for evolution or you can live with the dissonance. Neither decision will have any effect on the veracity of evolution.
06 Oct 05
1 edit
Originally posted by RatXHow did you discover that it wasn't science? How are you sure that you understood the great volumes that you read?
Wrong, wrong and wrong again... Your jumping to conclusions is astounding - just shows your closed-minded bigotted view.
I accepted evolution because I was taught it was Science. I dropped it when I discovered it wasn't. I don't prefer to have one god - I was convinced of this on multiple levels - not using selective evidence. I decided to research it all ...[text shortened]... because it lacks evidence, it doesn't make sense, it is not science and is a laughable theory.
To be fair, most science is based upon theory. It would be almost impossible to provide concrete evidence for most theories especially evolution, but evolution is now widley considered to be fact. It HAS been proven in many sub orders of other species.
What I do not understand is just because humans are more intelligent than other species on Earth, people do not accept that we are animals. Many animals display culture. Every animal is extremely inteligent and is equiped for its own purpose.
People talk about spirituality in humans. What's to say that a less intelligent animal does not percieve some magical or pantheistic qualities, like the dog that barks at fire, and is scared of its own reflection. Humans, at the early stages of evolution were also like this, and by their very nature attempted to attach reasons to how things are the way they are. But as time progresses, the gods of the waters and trees were dismissed as more awareness of our reality came about. In my mind, this is the same with religion and science. Whilst the occurence of human life on Earth has been explained through religion in the same way for thousnad of years, science has progressed and is constantly updated. And this is why more people are denouncing religious theory for science these days, like our ANCESTERS did years ago.
06 Oct 05
2 edits
Originally posted by RatXOriginally posted by RatX
Originally posted by David Cr@p
How clever you think you are. What you did, see, was take my username, David C, and add the r@p to it, thereby making it derogatory. Oh, the hilarity!
so here's my quick throw of more serious discussion...
Serious discussion? You have simply presented subjective 'proofs' and trotted out the same, tired fallacious 'arguments' that I've seen time and time again in this forum:
TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (I)
(1) Check out the world/universe/giraffe. Isn't it complex?
(2) Only God could have made them so complex.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CREATION
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true.
(2) Evolution can't be true.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INDULGENCE
(1) Atheists like to think that they can control their emotional desires.
(2) But they're Atheists, so they can't.
(3) Therefore, Atheists can indulge in whatever they feel like without worrying about committing sin.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LOVE
(1) Have you ever fallen in love?
(2) So what is the cause of love? Isn't it God?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
and so on.
Tell me, Rat....which of the many, many world religions do you consider the 'correct' one?
edit: nevermind. I see in another thread you've arbitrarily chosen Jesus as you saviour. That's super.