Evolution? How?

Brandon9000 wrote:

RexRed wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
RexRed wrote:
I am not referring to anyone specifically... but some people have a limited number of receptors and so they have to stimulate themselves artificially to achieve the same effect. Some can obtain nirvana from a flower petal or a simple sound (savant). Some need to jump from a plane to stimulate the risk receptors...

I hate to interrupt the little high on life thing you've got going on, but in fact, science has made easily visible progress since Newton, if not before. Let's see you make a car work with faith instead of an engine and fuel system. Crime scene units don't bring in priests to solve a crime, they bring in people trained in science. History is one long verification that science works verifiably. Religion, on the other hand, has produced no such verification. Religious officials were responsible for persecuting Galileo for saying that the Earth orbited the sun. You are writing your "disproof" of the scientific method on a PC over the Internet, probably under an electric light, all things that started in a lab, or on a paper analysis of the scientific cause and effect, or with experiments. You can put up a smokescreen of "poetic" phrases all day, but it doesn't change one iota the fact that logic and experiment are the only reliable way of determining what is true and what is false in matters of fact. Just out of curiosity, do you go to a faith healer when you're sick or a doctor?

God is first aid...

But ignorance persecuted Galileo not God...

Poetic phrases and "spirit" when your doctor fails you...

experiments and curiosity...

You are evading simple questions, presumably because you cannot defend your viewpoint. Do you go to a faith healer or a doctor when you are sick? Must I conclude that you are actually psychotic and cannot comprehend a simple line of argument?

You are misrepresenting what I said. I never said that God persecuted Galileo. I said that religious officials did.

Why wait for the doctor to fail you? Why not just go to a faith healer instead?

If we present simple logical arguments, and you answer with irrelevancies which do not even address what we have said, then there is no point in trying to speak to you. The discussion with you so far has gone something like this:

Us: But 1 and 1 is not 3, it's 2. Therefore, your conclusion is wrong.
You: God is more potent than any number.

Discussion is not always linear but sometimes has exponential factors and other figures of inherent form... So I do not limit my understanding to only one discipline. I like to ask myself questions and see parallels in different fields. Incubate and see "visions". I almost always step back from a question anyway. I like to look at the scope more often. I think I make a bit more sense than your example even though you may in a way have a point...

I have admitted that I believe in evolution and as a christian I think that is good. But I also believe the Bible teaches evolution. So I am not illusive about where I stand. I am not saying you are saying I am, but anyway... I also believe that evolution and the universe started from something. This is where I believe creation comes in... I still believe God is first aid...

"Seek ye first the kingdom of God"...

Smile

0 Replies

Brandon wrote

Quote:

Every argument must be judged on its merits alone, and the qualifications of the person who advanced it are irrelevant.

Does this apply to Darwin, Huxley et.al.? What degree(s) did they have?

0 Replies

Farmerman wrote

Quote:

Peter Popoff?? gimme a break.
I havent even considered those lowliest of slime who prey on the elderly's bank accounts by "soldiers of Christ"

It is too bad about these con's. They have been exposed yet still people blindly follow them. In true Christianity one follows Jesus and tests the preachers and teachers by using the bible (the infallable word of God. We won't go into the history of the Bible or the various translations, but it is about as obvious as a lawn mower in a jewelry store when these hucksters open their mouths. For a more rational and tempered look at the Bible and the teachings of Christ look at Chuck Smith and the Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa
http://www.calvarychapel.com/costamesa/
or http://www.ccmodesto.com/
For a real critical view on the hucksters just listen to any Steve Taylor song. (i.e. This disco used to be a cute cathedral, On the Fritz, Melt Down at Madame Tussaud's etc.)

0 Replies

Brandon wrote

Quote:

Us: But 1 and 1 is not 3, it's 2. Therefore, your conclusion is wrong.

First you have to use the right mathematical formula 1x1x1=1
The first 1 being God the father
The second 1 being God the Son (Jesus)
and The third 1 Being the God the Holy Spirit
:wink:

0 Replies

C.I. wrote

Quote:

If god is first aid, he sure did a bang up job in Indonesia with that 8.7 on the Rechter Scale which killed thousands. That tsunami was a first rate god action that also killed hundreds of thousands in one swipe. That loving god sure is mixed up.

God gave us life and in so doing gave us free will. When Eve and Adam ate of the forbidden fruit which was offered to them by Satan in the guise of a serpent (who I believe at the time still had arms and legs) then God gave this gift of life and the Earth over to them and basically let man and Satan have reign over the Earth. Did God create the earthquake and Tsunami I don't know but He allowed it to happen. The Bible says it rains on the just and the unjust alike.
As far as playing God...What about the the people involved with the decisions to end Teri Schivo's life?

0 Replies

Jackofalltrades wrote:

Brandon wrote
Quote:
Every argument must be judged on its merits alone, and the qualifications of the person who advanced it are irrelevant.

Does this apply to Darwin, Huxley et.al.? What degree(s) did they have?

Um...did I say that the qualifications of the person who advanced it are irrelevant? The last refuge of the incompetent debater is to attack the origin of an argument instead of its merits.

0 Replies

Jackofalltrades wrote:

Brandon wrote
Quote:
Us: But 1 and 1 is not 3, it's 2. Therefore, your conclusion is wrong.

First you have to use the right mathematical formula 1x1x1=1
The first 1 being God the father
The second 1 being God the Son (Jesus)
and The third 1 Being the God the Holy Spirit
:wink:

Your comment is irrelevant. The point I was making in the statement of which you reprinted a fraction was that RexRed answers simple logical arguments with comments not related to what was said.

0 Replies

Thanks REX for the reminder of the "Prince of the power of the air". He is a crafty old boy. Look how he" has turned the learned men against God".
BUT I think I found a portion of scripture BOTH sides of the debate can agree on...Genesis1:1(a) In the beginning. Yes there was a beginning, but how did it started is where we divide. I still can't buy the Primordial Ooze thing. It seems too hostile an enviroment for these delicate little protozoa critters to live in. The BIG BANG...where did the bang come from, Who lit the fuse, and the string theory ties me up in knots Laughing

Yup I guess it is a lot simpler for us unlearned simpletons to just have the blind faith to believe there is a God with out any "proof".

0 Replies

Jack of course it's simpler. And you're welcome to it.

And no, we don't all agree there was a beginning.

0 Replies

Brandon wrote

Quote:

Um...did I say that the qualifications of the person who advanced it are irrelevant? The last refuge of the incompetent debater is to attack the origin of an argument instead of its merits.

Sorry I attacked the origin of the argument. As for the merits go back a few pages (i think around page 60 or so) and see the merits of evolution, Darwin's origin of the Species and the effect it had on Marx, Lenin,Stalin,Hitler,Pol Pot etc. They embraced Darwin's work and used it to justify killing millions of innocent people. Thats merit!

0 Replies

Eorl, If you don't believe there was a beginning then do you believe there is an end?

0 Replies

Glad the bible never got put to any awful purpose, or that would certainly taint that little book of lies even more!....oh wait, crusades....witch burnings...most wars in history.....hmmmm.

You people that somehow draw a line from Darwin to Hitler really bug me. What you trying to do is wrong, perhaps I'd go so far as to say evil.

0 Replies

Beginning and end may or may not be related at all. I don't know the answers. I don't thnk you do either, you just think you do.

0 Replies

The line from Darwin to Hitler is based upon ignorance and some lines that were pronounced by Goebbels.
If we read Mein Kampf, Hitler made direct references therein to how God favored the Arians and the Arians were specialy created (Hitler also gave references to a young earth in which Creation had acieved its pinnacle by the Arians)
During the 1930s a lot of the phony archeology of the Reich included expeditions to find the original homeand of the Arians who, they felt, that they were dropped from heaven fully formed. The Creationists a;ways lose the Hitler argument so they quickly go to Stalin , who, by the way, also felt that Darwin was merely bourgeois and therefore wrong. Soviet science was based upon neo-Lamarkianism
I never get too worked up whenever a Creationist makes such connections in public since this is an almost "gimme" debate point in which the Creationists can lose all credibility in one swoop.
Eorl, rather than getting mad at them, blast them with facts of History, theyll always lose.

Creationist thinking is built upon a stool with only 2 legs, and most of their supplemental points are just BS and fraud.

0 Replies

wandeljw

Quote:

DOVER PENNSYLVANIA UPDATE

In a few weeks, Dover area voters will have the chance to create an entirely new school board. The current school board had been criticized for its decision to introduce "intelligent design" into high school biology classes as an alternative to Darwin's theory of evolution. Seven out of the nine seats on the Dover school board are on the ballot. Eighteen candidates are running for those seven seats. A poll of likely voters shows that 89% feel that the intelligent design issue will influence how they vote.

This is a scary basis for our kids education. As far as Im concerned, teaching science by the democratic process is like getting into an airliner and letting one of the passengers fly the plane. Guaranteed crash on takeoff. The ticket is crammed full of IDers who, wanting their point to be made, will hae their entire school district look like a bunch of snake-bitin hillbillies. The ACLU case will continue on and this craziness will have to be handled by the courts. I still predict that, by their present actions, and if the IDers win a clearmajority, this will go to the Fed District and then the Supreme Court.
If Dover SChool District had any idea about how stupid they look they would back off this track. Can you think that, if you have a child and you got transferred to the Dover area, where would you send your kids to school?. I would send my kids to a Catholic school and fight my tax assessment because it is being coopted by a religious wacko cause, and by the rules of the Pa Constitution and the US SUpreme Court, one can have full tax relief if the standards of the community do not represent your needs.This was successfully tested in a court case of Pa v (some AMish guy). The Amish have opened the door to have financing of a Pa school district removed by tax assessment as long as a substitute that meets the states ed requirements is available and is elected by the families.
I can see Dover becoming a big loser in the funds department. They havent thought this out very well.

0 Replies

Jackofalltrades wrote:

Brandon wrote
Quote:
Um...did I say that the qualifications of the person who advanced it are irrelevant? The last refuge of the incompetent debater is to attack the origin of an argument instead of its merits.
Sorry I attacked the origin of the argument. As for the merits go back a few pages (i think around page 60 or so) and see the merits of evolution, Darwin's origin of the Species and the effect it had on Marx, Lenin,Stalin,Hitler,Pol Pot etc. They embraced Darwin's work and used it to justify killing millions of innocent people. Thats merit!

The fact that someone who believed in evolution, if they did, did something bad has nothing whatever to do with that theory, anymore than the fact that some murderer reads the Tampa Tribune constitutes a condemnation of that paper. You appear to be a fount of invalid logic.

0 Replies

Quote:

Quote:
Every argument must be judged on its merits alone, and the qualifications of the person who advanced it are irrelevant.

Does this apply to Darwin, Huxley et.al.? What degree(s) did they have?

Darwin was being trained for the ministry and medicine. He didnt finish anyhing. He was kind of an ADD person who, brought it all together by a strong focus in his work done on the HMS Beagle. He was financially comfortable by marrying into the Wedgewood fortune.

The Huxleys(4 generations) were all academic giants

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

Glad the bible never got put to any awful purpose, or that would certainly taint that little book of lies even more!....oh wait, crusades....witch burnings...most wars in history.....hmmmm.

You people that somehow draw a line from Darwin to Hitler really bug me. What you trying to do is wrong, perhaps I'd go so far as to say evil.

You forgot the Spanish Inquisition.

0 Replies

NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!

0 Replies

farmerman,

Of the 18 candidates, 9 are ID advocates. 7 of the 9 ID candidates are already on the school board and were the ones who made the original decision. The nine other candidates do not support ID. There are 7 seats to be filled. It is possible that the seven incumbents could all lose because of having made a bad decision last October (promoting ID for high school biology).

0 Replies

Evolution? How?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know