@DiversityDriven,
DiversityDriven;56490 wrote:Can you answer the question or not?
Can't be answered yet. Such a thing (a) requires the nature of the universe to be known, and (b) not part of evolutionary science, so it is pointless.
It has no place in this debate. This is where your lack of knowledge starts to show.
Quote:And i'm asking your opinion on it, do you not have one? What the matter, subject a little to sensitive for you?
Nope, just out of reach. Again, not evolutionary science. What does this have to do with the subject at hand?
Quote:How is it not, without a subject evolution is nothing. How did the subject come to being and why did supposedly evolution direct it's course?
Evolutionary science deals with the diversification of life, nothing more. Origins of life are a different field entirely. All that the evolutionary process requires is life to exist. It doesn't matter where it comes from whatsoever. Never has, never will.
Life could very well be the result of an invisible pink unicorn from Jupiter blasting us with a ray from his great horn. It could be the result of a teapot in orbit between Earth and Mars. His Holy Noodliness could have done it. It could be the result of just the right temperature and ingredients to form complex proteins.
Of all of those, only one will be accepted by science: the last one. Wonder why? It's the only one we can test, measure and observe. It is the only hypothesis that can be validated or invalidated.
Quote:Why is it i can ask but you are not objective enough to.
I can ask all day. I can also be quite objective about it. I however must be scientific about it. Saying Goddidit doesn't work. That's not objectivity, because I cannot give equal testing to it and the scientific theory.
Let's pose a question to you, and see if you can answer it: How can one be "objective" to a view that is not held to the same standard as other views? Why does this view not require evidence like all the others, why does it not need testing like all the others, why does it not need to go through the same process?
In fact, I am being quite objective to the views of creation and intelligent design. It does NOT stand up like the scientific view. It does NOT have any evidence or predictive power like the scientific view. Therefore it is discarded because it has LESS.
Quote:Irrelevant to someone who cannot encompass the question. According to evolution, it's been around from the very start right? So was it around before us? Did it start on this planet, is it prodominant throughout the universe? Why is it forbidden to ask question like these?
There is no forbidden to these questions. There is however ignorance to them.
Read closely: Evolution does NOT deal with the origins of life. This is why your attempts to criticize evolution using it is completely laughable. I can total your argument just from the SECOND SENTENCE. You don't get the answer you are looking for because you are asking the wrong question. You don't ask a plumber to fix a car. You don't ask a welder to build a wood cabinet. Similarly, you don't ask evolution for the origins of life.
You need to stop and learn. Understand why you are asking the wrong questions instead of being upset because you get the wrong answer. Learn. Learn these theories, understand what they mean and what they say. Because, and I am being honest here, you sound like a six year old trying to figure out the inner workings of a jet engine.
The usual "Well, where did the FIRST stuff come from? Ha! Must be GOD!"
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace