- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
22 May 12
Originally posted by tim88well there we have it, somebody has finally proven the existence of god. well done tim88 on a well thought out and executed piece of pure logic. solid work. we can all pack up now and get on with our lives.
They did not see their parents build the nests ?
Answer god
"Hallelujah"
one quick question though timmy, how did you learn how to masturbate? did god show you? or did you learn from your parents?
22 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by tim88(Proverbs 30:24-28) . . .There are four things that are the smallest of the earth, but
They did not see their parents build the nests ?
Answer god
"Hallelujah"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=fqgPmnW8yCU&NR=1
they are instinctively wise: the ants are a people not strong, and yet in the summer
they prepare their food; the rock badgers are a people not mighty, and yet upon a
crag is where they put their house; the locusts have no king, and yet they go forth all
of them divided into groups; the gecko lizard takes hold with its own hands and it is in
the grand palace of a king.
clearly the Bible describes such creatures as instinctively wise 🙂
22 May 12
Originally posted by stellspalfieI learned from my step-father.
well there we have it, somebody has finally proven the existence of god. well done tim88 on a well thought out and executed piece of pure logic. solid work. we can all pack up now and get on with our lives.
one quick question though timmy, how did you learn how to masturbate? did god show you? or did you learn from your parents?
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
22 May 12
Originally posted by RJHindsi see timmys fooled you with his 1880's cockney chimney sweep boy charm. dont be fooled he's playing us like a puppet master.
He has said nothing about it. You were the one that brought it up. If you really want to know how everyone learned. Maybe, break the ice by telling us all how you learned, with all the details.
whooaa RJ!!!!! what did you just ask me? you want me to whisper, slowly in your web ear about how i masturbate while i do a dance for you? is that what you asked?. what would mrs RJ say!!!!!
okay 15.00 quid and its a deal. no touching though.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
22 May 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobie"Instinct" used to be the scientific version of the god of the gaps. If it isn't learned, say it's instinct. That explains exactly nothing.
(Proverbs 30:24-28) . . .There are four things that are the smallest of the earth, but
they are instinctively wise: the ants are a people not strong, and yet in the summer
they prepare their food; the rock badgers are a people not mighty, and yet upon a
crag is where they put their house; the locusts have no king, and yet they go forth all ...[text shortened]... e grand palace of a king.
clearly the Bible describes such creatures as instinctively wise 🙂
22 May 12
Originally posted by JS357Except the word itself is meant to be descriptive, not explanatory. We categorise as 'instinct' behaviours that are not learned but are nevertheless displayed by a given life form.
"Instinct" used to be the scientific version of the god of the gaps. If it isn't learned, say it's instinct. That explains exactly nothing.
23 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsHere is my objection to the intelligent source thing: I would think a god would take the easiest route to achieve a goal, maybe in this case, making viable life forms. So in my way of thinking, such a god would figure, why would I want to do all that detail work, why not just set up the conditions and let nature take its course?
It explains they were programmed with this instinct by an intelligent source.
Why would a god want to guide every molecule inside every DNA structure to consciously make all the changes it wants to happen? For one thing, if it wanted to, it would already know what the end result would be so it could just as easily make the end result and not do all the scut work involved in actually monitoring every strand of DNA on the planet. What this ID thing implies goes past ridiculous.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
23 May 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadIt was given that empty "none of the above" usage in the 50's, but before then, was posited to mean behavior that did not rely on cognition or consciousness. It's good if everyone here views the term as you suggest.
Except the word itself is meant to be descriptive, not explanatory. We categorise as 'instinct' behaviours that are not learned but are nevertheless displayed by a given life form.