Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

He's nothing if not entertaining, that's for sure.

Remember, Gunga is a big proponent of savage Neanderthals and of alien artifacts on Mars. And he's really into the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology, both of which are used to support to the "Purple Haze" origin of time as part of the Saturn Death Cult. All of which assume time-frames well in excess of 10k years.

I'm not sure how he fits the "Flood" into his mythology, but that never stopped anyone else so I'm sure he's found a way to rationalize it.

I think most religious people throw away logic and facts in order to maintain their belief in the super god in the sky. All my siblings are victims. Scientists have studied the evolution of homo sapiens based on available facts, but that doesn't seem to override their belief in the bible that contains many errors and contradictions. I doubt many recover their senses after they buy into their religious beliefs.

or they compartmentalize their belief vs the facts. Religions were never based on facts, they are totally faith based and to try to say otherwise is a dis service to facts and to religion.

I'm one of those who cannot compartmentalize religion vs science to keep faith in any religion. The contradictions are overwhelming.

The Christian religion is a personal relationship with the intelligence that designed the universe and the systems in it, for a purpose or ontology that He alone established. I reverse engineered to a designer that must be larger than our universe and therefore can exist outside of it.

There is no faith involved in my understanding how the system works and who brought it into existence because only one person fits the requirements necessary for someone to establish a system this large and complex.

1. It is a fact that most if not all of science does not understand why we have gravity, the nuclear forces, and the physical constants.

2. Nor do they understand the origination of matter and life.

So it is obvious science doesn't understand these complex systems and for that reason cannot replicate these complex systems. The reason we cannot replicate them is because man does not meet the basic requirements of an entity that can create these systems. The main requirement is ----- the designer must be outside the system to create the system. That is logical philosophical understanding of ontology. A designer cannot create a system it is part of. That is logic not religion.

You take it on faith that the systems popped into existence and then a more complex system (life) popped int existence later and some day you might be able to understand those points about the system that you and nobody else in science understands.

I believe Jesus designed the system because he is the only one that fits the parameters set up by science and history that the designer of the universe is required to meet. He is the only one that legitimately claimed to do it. He is the only one that could consistently predict what the system was going to do and how it works. And, he is the only one capable of manipulating the system on a scale greater than human capability. The historical documentation of this is verifiable.

So if you imagine how Jesus arranged the particles that construct a higgs boson that construct the higgs field that in turn are combined to construct matter you would understand all those things that science doesn't. And, you can do it without the faith required to believe it happened by chance and the faith required to believe some day you will understand it.

Why don't you ask the right question "How did somebody do this?" And then do some research and use your imagination to figure out how they did it how so you don't have to believe a lie on faith?

It takes less faith for me to believe Jesus is the creator of the universe than to believe there is an old man at a keyboard typing farmers responses.

That's really funny! ............ LOL .......... No one has yet produced evidence of this "intelligence."

How planet earth and humans evolved.
https://viraldazed.com/how-planet-earth-and-humans-evolved/

I believe in your intelligence and you believe in mine and both of us are believing on less evidence than there is proving Jesus is the creator. Do you believe i exist?

Why not reply to gunga in civil discourse. he made good points that are all true.

maybe in your mind they are "true". They are all unfalsifiable at the least. His "feather story" has been debunked by gene editing , fossil record and developmental embryology.

Hes light years away from "truth" . You appear to be easily swayed, science cannot be so gullible

All youve done i to glom a phrase of which you have neither
1knowledge in practice or

2demonstratible experience cmon, stop the persistent bullshitting

Neither can I but Ive got a lot of respect for guys like Ken Miller or Dan Fairbanks who, while being practicing Christians, can have their god be totally transcendent.

That includes th ridiculousness of Intelligent Design Creationism (CID)

I honestly don't mind when people believe in god(s). I just resent when illogical conclusions are pushed with force with the intent of undoing science. I sometimes lose patience with such types and become insulting, which I know is wrong. I will try to be better about this.

they dont seem to give a tiny rats ass about how they misinterpret , misquote , or insult their opponents. They sort of havve a mind set that "because its for religious "truth" , its all acceptable"

You have no responsibility to be respectful to their kind of anti-science BS, as well as to their desires to invade public school science with their mythological ****.

Their networks are well funded and chock full of host writers and think tank members (Ken Ham is a multi multi million dollar operation that i actually operating out of Australia so it can avoid a lot of the USSC diicta . They believe that they are above laws and "Answer to a higher power" That might work for Hebrew National Hot Dogs but not science in our schools

So true~! It's actually dangerous, because young people are very impressionable, and they'll get the wrong idea about what's fact and what's fiction. We can see that by the many christian adults who do not teach facts about evolution.

Ok debunk it.

It’s already debunked. All lame wild-ass unsupported ideas are bunk by default. They start that way. They don’t get to become non-bunk until they have been proven.

The same can be said about random processes resulting in matter, life. and sexual reproduction.

Im not going through the whole thing again and again of your memory is at early stage short term loss. Weve discussed this over and damned over again.

Ok I will sum it up then.
Your argument was that the system can make the necessary changes without intelligence.

I respond with every system that creates complexity (a system with artificial intelligence) has a designer.

You respond with this one doesn't because, there are some rules that, the system of natural evolution has always followed that, we don't need to know the origin of.

Which leads to two alternatives.

1. If brian just understood those rules as well as farmer (or at least as well as scientific consensus does) brian would understand why these rules don't need an intelligent originator.

or

2. It is obvious that those rules always existed. They existed before anything else. It is scientific consensus that the statement is a fact and brian just needs to accept that as a fact because it is scientific consensus.

Am I correct in saying that the statement in bold letters is the crux of your argument?

Could you clarify which is closer to summing up our argument or if there is a third alternative and, which better represents your understanding of our positions?

rules exist. We discover them through time, so far no "big intelligence" is needed