Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

Not all of them though. Just the ones that fit the bill.

Why don't you tell us which is the 'book' (?! in the quotation marks) that I get my 'knowledge' (also ?! in quotation marks)?
The real question actually is 'What is the information that we are missing to define the problem properly in the first place?'.
Actually it is a set of questions:
- Has the universe always existed or it has been created (through evolution?!) at some point?
- Is the world knowable -no matter whether on the ground of missing or misinterpreted information or limitations in our knowledge to do so?
- Which is the primary: the Intelligence or the Matter?
- If the big bang has 'created' the universe, what has been there 'before' that ... and where did the big bang get all that information (not to mention the energy) to execute the creation?
- Can information in the universe be lost (no matter whether in the quantum equation of the black hole or as a result of newly developed processes that cannot retrieve the former information 'databases')?
- If the information cannot be lost (but can only emerge) isn't there any danger for us personally to get lost some day in such ocean of information ... and to become unable to distinguish the essence from the spam?
- When some new logical inferences ... and hypotheses are made, who how and when verifies the 'old knowledge' in terms of the new information?
- Can any theory (not only evolution and the big bang) self-proclaim itself to be valid ... if it is based on a black box?
- What part of the universe is 'made' by ID (of any kind) and what part is due to stochastic processes (of any kind)?
- Are we the only intelligent life form within feasible range in that part of the universe?
- How did it happen 'to get knowing' that we are the first intelligent life form in our galaxy (for example)?
- Are the stochastic processes in the development of space and time ... and life really stochastic, or we simply call them so for we cannot find math logic models 'to arrange' them properly?
... when will we get to know the world in which we are living ... if some people are continuously hiding ... and misrepresenting information of any kind ... often by reasons that are not entirely cognizable, etc.

You are the biggest pseudo-intellect I've ever seen.

Were arguing science with Charlie Brown and some Welsh coal miner. Whats wrong with this picture?
Ill tell ya, A2k doesn't get the best Creationist adversaries on the "Evo/Devo" culture wars. We get the second and third strings.

I don't know whether you should be so quick to include yourself in the "galactic we"

You know, several years ago we had this joker here who was attending some religious university in Wales. He claimed to be a champion debater who demolished everyone's arguments, while providing nothing more in the way of a rhetorical stance than "he said--she said" types of statements. I would no be surprised if this clown is not the same person, sartor resartus[/u].

Give us an idea what the first stringers are like and explain how they would be the sort of challenge you prefer to take on as being more appropriate to your superior intellect and not cause you to resort to hiding them on Ignore or feel the need to have your hair cut again.

Just for a change fm--answer that you silly old moocow.

And while we are privileged to be in the presence of your first string input (another inside out assertion) tell us what evolutionary advantage truth has over error.

And why Gaia theory is necessarily animist as you said it was.

And what you would suggest to replace religious belief and practice.

You're a short, wet length of discarded cotton thread of the lowest denier such as is used to stitch the gusset reinforcement of the upmarket knickers.

You can't even do ******* insults any better than you could at 12. Which goes to show what evo can achieve when applied with fervour.

It's a good job little tweaks of psychological pleasure don't have the same effect on the cranial container as sugar lumps do on the body. Otherwise your head would look like the gasometer at the Oval cricket ground does when it's fully charged.

That's why pride is a greater sin than gluttony. There's a self regulating mechanism in gluttony and lust and there is not for pride. Pride is infinitely extensible. It will even use women as a billboard to trumpet its excellence to the world deeming it unfitting for itself to do the job.

Hence pride is a greater danger than gluttony or lust in the Christian perspective. None of the deadly sins have any meaning in an atheist perspective but pride cannot be checked as gluttony and lust can. Pride has no self-regulating mechanism.

One might easily see why Media never mentions pride as a seriously destructive agent in society and prefers to distract itself by a morbid, terrier-like, focus on lesser depravities and lesser dangers. Overdo lust and you are spark out for week. Overdo gluttony and worse things than that are in store.

And an overweening sense of pride comes over whenever a spokesperson of the scientific profession appears on our screens in a carefully directed scene with mathematically designed, to a certain extent at least, animations. They are full of it.

Beware of the fuckers is all I'm saying. They can seep up through the floor and in at the perfectly carpentered closed door and before you know it you're up to your neck.

And they couldn't make one drop of Barbadillo Oloroso starting from where the IDers started. They would hunt down every last bottle and destroy them out of sheer frustrated envy.

When you mix your idiotic questions with insults , do you ever wonder why no one ever answers them?

Id think that you should feel more comfortable participating in some S&M forum

What a wet Nelly excuse that is.

Apisa uses it too. That I don't respect him. Setanta too. That I'm spurious. I have forgotten ros's excuse. Not daring to admit the ground is shakier than previously thought is more like it. And the keen desire to remain in the previous thought.

I've had a pretty good dose of insults. Plenty from you. That post was one.

How do you define S&M?

I'm quite comfortable here. It's the only site I participate in.

That's because in many cases these aren't Evolution/Creationism debates or even Science/Theology debates, they are in reality Rationality/Irrationality debates.

FM, I am also interested in your answer to this question.
Pls, avoid using in the answer 'you are ...', 'I am ...', 'your idiotic ...', 'my supreme intelligence ...', 'this is the most stupid ... I have ever heard/seen ... in this thread/on the web' and others of the kind ... if possible.
Just answering the question would be enough.

WHY? Are you toounable to comprehend some simpler concepts. Im an atheist that should be good enough for anyone with an IQ above 70.

This thread is about your denial of evolution, not my life without a god.

Im getting a bit concerned that were in an "intelligence retrograde" period. Maybe its something with the planets not aligning with the gutters and downspouts.

O.K., evolution is one possible & plausible explanation of the evidences (from the rocks of the right type), but it is not verified and validated ... in terms of feasibility, for example. Can mutations create by stochastic processes new better species ... and did the things happen in that way?
The GMOs only prove that the things could have happened by ID and that ID is able to create new varieties and new breeds.
Can you give an example for the big bang to have created recently some new variety of apples or grapes or whatever?

Why don't you simply answer the question?

are you considering peptide linkeages and surface chemistry reactions as "Stochastic"?? Where the hell do you reach and grab these nonsensical bullshit ideas.


EVERY TIME a gene turns on or off, that limits the expressions that that same gene can make in subsequent switching. ITS NOT STOCHASTIC . STOCHASTIC MEANS RANDOM.

If you can come up with a better hypothesis which also fits all the empirical evidence then science would be open to exploring it. To date however, nobody has done so, or even come close.

It is verified and validated, many many times over. That's exactly why it's still considered a scientific fact.

Biological Evolution is not a stochastic process. People have been telling you that over and over now for weeks if not months on this thread and you still keep repeating it without addressing it. That is irrational behavior.

ID is equivalent to Magic, and as such, is not (and never will be) even considered as a scientific theory. So you might as well just toss it out and give up, it's a non-starter, doesn't even qualify to run the race.

The Big Bang has nothing to do with Biological Evolution. You don't benefit your arguments by jumping all over the place as though you don't understand the difference.

Here you are fm on Gaia.





The impression given by those, assuming most people won't notice "all", is that Lynn Margulis (born Lynn Alexander;[1] March 5, 1938 – November 22, 2011)[2] was an American biologist and University Professor in the Department of Geosciences at the University of Massachusetts Amherst

Here you are fm on Gaia.





The impression given by those, assuming most people won't notice the "all", is that Lynne Margulis is an animist. (Read nut case). And she is an American biologist and University Professor in the Department of Geosciences at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

And in a punctuated parenthesis in one of her paragraphs she wrote there is this---, Gaia, the physiologically regulated Earth,---and thus you blackened the name of an eminent scientist with animism when she gave you no reason to do so.

That's how you lead your claque up the garden path. From you they learn that Gaia theory is animistic and it isn't. And what you said was nothing but a gratuitous, incorrect, unjust and unsubstantiated smear in the service of your denial, for professional purposes. of man made global warming so that you can continue to believe that providing cheaper energy is a respectable and even an admirable occupation when there are many scientists who think it is the road to ruin.

Something in the clickworks did that.