|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
 Posted - 05/17/2001 : 22:24:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Simply, I believe in God by faith.
Fine! Believe in god by all means. Don't cram him/her/it down my throat. And don't even begin to explain science using the a word of mouth collection of some 66 different stories as a reason.
quote:
1) Theory of stellar evolution says suns in early stage produce energy by gravitational contraction. Once this heats up to about 10,000,0000 F fusion starts. This process takes from 100,000 to 500,000 years depending on mass. The process of fusion releases neutrinos in its process. The trouble is we cannot detect but about a third of the amount predicted. This indicates we have a much younger sun than 4.5 billion years.
Whose words are these, where's the scientific proof regarding this proclamation! I think astrophysists know a little more than you or someone who purchased a diploma from a PO Box.
quote:
2) If everything is a process of random change over time, then our thoughts are nothing more than random events and our discussion about evolution meaningless.
Meaningless by what standards. These are questions regarding how things happened. We are a sentient, thinking, self aware, questioning species. Not believing or not using belief in god resign these questions to meaninglessness? Why, what logic do you use to come to that assertion?
quote:
3) Evolutionists argue that similarity of design proves evolution. But similarity of design more logically points to a designer. If all life came from a single set of genetic instructions of a cell 4.5 billion years ago then we would not see the variety we see today.
4.5 billion years is a long time. Sufficient apparently for the wide variety of species on earth today. Besides, your forgetting that there were cataclysmic events that altered the earths environment during that time. Resulting in drastic changes between the many species over the years. Wouldn't there be similarities between divergent species, after all the evolutionist claim is all life evolved from a single celled organism a few billion years ago. Inherent similarities would be passed from that single celled organism to all organisms evolved from it, that's the process of evolution.
quote:
4) Evolutionists argue that organisms are suited for their environment because they evolved into it. It is more logical to say that they were created for their environment because many different species live in each environment and interact with it unique ways. If each evolved we would see fewer species because natural selection would eliminate those who were less efficient.
Why, what makes one more logical than the other? Faulty logic at best. Humans, in many respects are an inefficient species, yet we survive.
quote:
5) If we all came from the same primordial cell we would all be cannibals by the act of eating a carrot or a steak.
And your point? In many parts of the world, cannibalism is still practiced. We might find the thought abhorrent, but they don't. And don't tell me about pagan satanists!
Trish
Edited by - Trish on 05/17/2001 22:29:50 |
 |
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2001 : 22:26:12 [Permalink]
|
Continued...
quote:
6) Evolution is a faith of the small and crude changing into the big and complex. It is true the small seed or baby grows larger and more complex in a temporary reversal of entropy, but the seed and baby both come from adults in an entropy equalizing, recursive process. The seed and the baby are hardly crude either, both are amazing in complexity in their internal DNA coding fully equal to the adults.
Braaant. Wrong answer. Evolution is defined as:
quote:
1. BIOLOGY theory of development from earlier forms: the theoretical process by which all species develop from earlier forms of life. On this theory, natural variation in the genetic material of a population favors reproduction by some individuals more than others, so that over the generations all members of the population come to possess the favorable traits.
2. BIOLOGY developmental process: the natural or artificially induced process by which new and different organisms develop as a result of changes in genetic material
Your definition of evolution is in relation to the politic process. Ensure in future you are defining this process correctly!
quote:
7) If as evolutionist say our “selfish genes” are geared for only survival and the passing on of our genetic code, how is it we have need for love, friendship, altruism, etc. Why would one give up his life for a friend or even stranger?
Emotion is part of the chemical processes in the brain. In other words, our brain cells reacting to the stimulus of chemicals released in certain situation. This is a fairly well documented area of research. We recognize these emotions and name them because we are a species capable of thoughts beyond surviving tomorrow. (Does this apply to other species, can someone help here?)
quote:
8) After 160+ years transitional links found = 0, nada, zilch!
I'd check that fact again. Try a website dedicated to paleontology, not religion!
quote:
9) If no change occurred in the last 4000 years in DNA sequencing in studies done on Egyptian mummies, then it is reasonable to assume that the enormous amount of change necessary for evolution could not occur in 25,000,000 years.
I'd like to know where this came from. Simple possibility, wasn't necessary or a plateau in the evolutionary process. The human is an extremely complex organism.
quote:
Why must you dissect everything? Seriously, you basically wrote out my entire post!
That is what skeptics do.
Trish |
|
|
|
bestonnet_00
Skeptic Friend
Australia
358 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 03:21:02 [Permalink]
|
About Neutroinos, we can only detect Electron Neutronios with our detectors, muon and tau neutronios could account for the rest.
It is possible to change what type of neutronio it is while going from the sun to the earth if they have mass. |
|
|
|
Bozola
Skeptic Friend
USA
166 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 10:35:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
8) After 160+ years transitional links found = 0, nada, zilch!
This one always annoys me the most. Transitional forms appear to be defined by creation idiots as the fossil form between the two fossils in question. This is not unlike Zeno's paradigm.
Arf! |
|
|
|
sega
Skeptic Friend
USA
73 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 10:39:52 [Permalink]
|
My God!! Was that an ad homenim argument you used previously bestonnet? Shame on you
|
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 12:28:04 [Permalink]
|
Why must you dissect everything? Seriously, you basically wrote out my entire post!
I would never dream of being so rude as to make comment on a persons privately held beliefs. They are between him and his gods.
However if that person decides that these beliefs are not private, if they bring them to a public forum and then try to impose them on other people who they know do not share them…well then…the gloves come off. Remember, Jar, it was you who decided to come here in an attack mode.
Simply, I believe in God by faith. You should try it some time.
Like every other Atheist that I know of my generation-- I did try it. We were all raised as believers. Fortunately we were able to spare our children this ordeal.
It was a stupid comment by a young lady I knew when I was an under graduate that put me on the road to Atheism. She said (when confronted by the first Atheist either of us had ever met) "I don't need proof. I have faith!" Pretty much the same thing you just said. The Atheist replied, "That be a good thing, cause Honey, you'se ain't got no proofs." So I went out looking for them. I figured it couldn't be that hard proving god existed. After all, "everybody" said he did.
I became an Atheist because I am an honest man. I was forced to admit that all the data conflicted with my deeply held religious convictions. I had to do a complete 180, or spend the rest of my life lying to myself. I chose the truth whether I liked it or not.
And just for the record, there is way more evidence against evolution than there is for creationism and I think you're just too blind to open your eyes or minds. Evolution simply could never happen!…
Well this shows you to be a big fibber. No sooner do you tell us that facts don't matter to you…you believe because you are credulous, or as you pompously put it, you have faith….than you hit us with a bunch of supposed "facts." Make up your mind, facts or faith.
And let me clue you in on a few things about evolution. No one bases his or her religious opinions on it. The Roman Catholic Church and all the main stream Protestant denominations have no problem with it. I have never met an Atheist who even considered it when they were deciding to become an Atheist.
Look on the home page of this site and you will find piece on what the bible says about a flat Earth and geo-centrism. It seems quaint and humorous in this modern age. I can assure you Galileo wasn't laughing.
You are afraid that Darwin shows that the bible is lying. You are right, he does. But, hell, Copernicus had already taken care of that hundreds of years before him.
When you consider that the bible demands that you believe that the clouds in the sky are the dust stirred up by god stumbling around up there, you find that the weather girl on channel four nightly demonstrates the bibles deceptions.
The only so called religion that gives a rat's ass about evolution is Christian Fundamentalism. This sorry collection of cults didn't officially form until 1915 and is purely an American phenomenon; the Europeans (for the most part) won't let these yahoos in the door. They completely ignore Saint Augustan 's admonition not to take the bible literally. But they are ready and willing to lie, cheat, steal and even murder (see clinic bombings and "Last Temptation" shootings) to impose their perverted will on the rest of us.
You, Jar, are certainly willing to lie by the looks of your "9 things to ponder."
Another thing about Evolution is you seem to think that if you can disprove it then Creationism will be the sole winner.
Evolution is a scientific theory. As such it assuredly can be overthrown by another theory that better fits the observable facts. That is a basic thing about science. Theories change as we gain more information.
Newton's theory of gravity was eventually overthrown. But when it was two things didn't happen. First nobody went floating up into the air. Second we did not revert to the biblically based "science" of Holy Spirit Force. HSF, which was what the Protestant Church mandated before Newton, stated that god's holy spirit assured that all things would seek their proper level. Einstein was not concerned with the holy ghost.
If Evolution is ever overthrown it won't be by Creationism. Creationism as a theory was discarded long, long, ago because it contains one major and insurmountable flaw.
There isn't any creator.
|
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 12:59:11 [Permalink]
|
Emotion is part of the chemical processes in the brain. In other words, our brain cells reacting to the stimulus of chemicals released in certain situation. This is a fairly well documented area of research. We recognize these emotions and name them because we are a species capable of thoughts beyond surviving tomorrow. (Does this apply to other species, can someone help here?)
Current thought among animal behaviorists is that this holds true (to one degree or another) for all animals who hunt in packs.
For instance back in the 70s it was thought that dogs were only mimicking "true" emotions.We have since found that this is not the case.
Edited by - slater on 05/18/2001 13:00:05 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 13:17:52 [Permalink]
|
Slater I was going to post something like what you said. I do find it unbelievable that Creationists think that attacking Evolution proves their point of view. Nothing could be farther from the truth. A real discussion could take place here if Creationists provided a real theory that we could look into. Still waiting....
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 16:42:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
A real discussion could take place here if Creationists provided a real theory that we could look into. Still waiting....
To give Jar Jar the credit he so richly deserves, he did come up with a novel theory
6) Evolution is a faith of the small and crude changing into the big and complex. It is true the small seed or baby grows larger and more complex in a temporary reversal of entropy, but the seed and baby both come from adults in an entropy equalizing, recursive process.
I have had occasion to complain to my children that it was they who gave me this white hair. This brilliant new version of the second law of thermodynamics offers a unique angle on why people who have many children are driven into early graves. Just think, if you didn't have kids at all you would never grow old and die.
Christians do make a habit of promising you "eternal life." I had always supposed they meant a rather disappointing one where you actually had to die and rot while some little tiny indescribable something lived on in a never seen "other" world. Yuch! But now, you can beat that nasty old entropy, just don't have kids.
Isn't physics a wonderful thing?
Hallelujah!
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 21:29:09 [Permalink]
|
I had something I wanted to add, but I'm going to move it over to the Creation/Evolution thread, where I think this thread, as it has evolved (<- pun!) belongs. "Creationists' Arguments"
------------
Gambatte kudasai!
Edited by - tokyodreamer on 05/18/2001 21:29:36 |
|
|
|
rubysue
Skeptic Friend
USA
199 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 21:35:28 [Permalink]
|
Why are the fine folks on this board bothering to respond to Jar-Jar??? This individual is obviously impervious to any reason or science, so what's the point in getting your undies in a twist over some empty-headed zealot's blatherings? I do not pretend to be a doctoral expert in evolutionary biology or cosmological theory,, so my responses would also look woefully defensive and incomplete. Even if you send dear JarJar Binks45 to the best evolution sites (e.g., talkorigins.org), his/her/its mind is obviously made up and just trying to get a rise out of us poor hell-bound non-believers (nothing like the opiate of religious fervor to blind a fanatic to other possibilities, like the truth).
Yeah, I know, the dark side seems to be winning more battles every day in their frightening attempts to turn us into little drones for Jesus. I don't know what the answer is - maybe a drug that turns off that part of the brain that is "god driven".
Must be the Chardonnay talking...forgive the babbling.
rubysue
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 21:38:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Must be the Chardonnay talking...forgive the babbling.
I myself am a happy drunk. No frowns from me! No need to apologize.
But in regards to JarJar, mesa thinks that responding to people like, um, him? is what makes coming here fun! And who knows, maybe we'll get through to him/her/it. Like Slater said, alot of us are former theists. And look at us now!  We "saw the light". So can JarJar, hopefully.
------------
Gambatte kudasai! |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2001 : 23:00:25 [Permalink]
|
Don't forget that not just Jar_jar reads this forum. There are many, many lurkers. Trust me, I've seen the usage reports. I also see that the spiders are doing a good job of indexing these threads so there's a good chance that many other folks will stumble upon all this. Yeah, lot's of them will have their minds made up one way or the other, but who know.....perhaps a few won't.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2001 : 14:01:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Why are the fine folks on this board bothering to respond to Jar-Jar??? This individual is obviously impervious to any reason or science, so what's the point in getting your undies in a twist over some empty-headed zealot's blatherings?
I must say that I disagree with you, and I'll explain why.
When I first moved to the US and entered the New York City Public School System my life was made a living hell by schoolyard bullies. It would always start with my being approached by some mouth breather and several of his toadies. Then it would be, "Your name is stupid," or "You talk weird," or "Hey, you four eyed freak." Followed me trying to be nice, or ignoring them in the hopes they would go away, or my turning the other cheek. It would end with my getting the crap kicked out of me.
My Dad taught me the secret of how to deal with this problem.
Nice, ordinary people never ever approach you in this hostile manner, only bullies, so you don't have to worry about hurting them. As soon as these bullies show up, no matter how many of them there are, as soon as one makes his intention clear --smash him in the face. A bloody nose will calm them right down.
Three times in one week I did this. They never hit back.
After that I, and my friends, were never bothered again all the time we were in grade school.
Creationists/Fundamentalists who approach Atheists are nothing but schoolyard bullies. "Hey you, Agnostic!! You ain't gonna enter the Kingdom of Heaven. I tell ya in all "love" that your kind is gonna burn in eternal torment cause you ain't no good!"
If you let them pull this on you they will continue without let up. They will find others to bully. Our President, George II, is taking you tax dollars and giving it to "faith based charities"-- same BS as stealing your lunch money. There was a bill before congress a couple of years ago that would have made it a crime to say anything that could be construed as anti-religion.
For 1500 years it was their policy to murder Atheists and confiscate their (and their families) belongings. The Jesus character in Mathew instructs them to do just that.
On THE NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER on the steps of San Jose City Hall ( not east Podunk, not the bible belt --Silicon Valley!!) a government sponsored, with the Mayor in attendance, prayer meeting was held where a creationist minister demanded that "Atheistic Evolution" be stricken from the schools.
Thugs and bullies getting away with it because no one is brave enough to stop them. These "empty-headed zealot's blatherings" that you hear are the sound of your freedom being stolen.
Now- a- days instead of a left hook I smack them in the nose with facts and logic. Almost as effective, if not as satisfying.
You get the same response that bullies always give. "Hey, why'd you do that? I didn't do nothing."
And @tomic is right, other people are reading this, and they are standing up for their rights too. I've seen snippets from SFN on two or three other web sites. And I had a friend show me a letter to the editor that he said looked like the type of thing that I would say. In fact it was something that I had said right here.
If you ignore these christo-punks they will not go away. If you turn the other cheek they will hit that one too. If you hold them in such disdain as to be beneath your notice that will only encourage them to impose their loutish behavior on even more people.
Phew! How I do carry on. Time for a nice quiet sit down and maybe a Norvasc or two. Always did like that Tom Paine guy.
When the dead talk -- they talk to him |
|
|
|
rubysue
Skeptic Friend
USA
199 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2001 : 15:04:32 [Permalink]
|
To Tokyodreamer, Atomic and Slater: Your responses to my last post are compelling arguments. To be honest, I'm scared to death of religious zealots, and fundamentalist Christians in this country are the worst of the lot. America has become one giant God-happy festival and anyone who dares to think freely or question dogma is painted with the ugliest names and accused of being responsible for "dragging our Christian nation into a secular moral hell". All you have to do is read the letters to the editor of most major newspapers to realize that non-believers are being accused of every atrocity ever perpetuated on this planet because we "took prayer out of school and replaced it with the Satanic religion of evolution".
I, too, went through a period of my life many years ago when I was hypnotized by the blandishments of fervent Christianity (even going so far as to read Hal Lindsay crap and worrying about the end times). However, even during those fevered times, I never tossed my love of science out the door and refused to give in to the creationist argument. This stubborn kernel of rationalism in my brain probably led to my eventual rejection of the rest of the Xian dogma. I agree that lurkers can be influenced if the arguments against creationist drivel are objective, cogent and academic. However, fighting Jar-Jar with insults and argumentum ad hominem responses probably doesn't do a lot to persuade someone who might be sitting on the fence. I admit it can be cathartic (not to mention fun) to insult the hell out of someone spouting this drivel so you can exhibit your intellectual superiority over their pathetic beliefs. I used this approach a few times against moon hoaxers and then spent hours recovering because I felt like a jerk and I'm sure I never persuaded anyone to change their minds but only served to make them more sure of their position.
This was the core premise of my earlier argument - I am not an evolutionary biologist or cosmological physicist, although I have read many articles in both areas. I believe the best thing someone can do when presented with a post like that made by Jar-Jar is to find a way to argue from authority and send Jar-Jar on his merry way to talkorigins.org or find compelling arguments from that site and post them here as responses.
Thoughts?
rubysue
Edited by - rubysue on 05/19/2001 15:10:45 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
