Answering an evolutionist argument.

by hooberus 39 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Abaddon
    Abaddon

    hooberus

    I am not 'dropping the qualifying charaters', I am saying the qualifying characters are essentially Creationists and IDots (or is it IDites?) saying "but in this case our postulated designer doesn't need a designer because we say so".

    Did you not see I was already catering for your predictable protestation in the way that I phrased my initial comment to you?

    It is still a form of special pleading; without any evidence what-so-ever such people make the implict claim that intelligent non-biological entities either generate sponataneously in some undescribed fashion, or are external to space and time.

    Both are just based on the say-so of you and your chums... and given the lack of ability to show me how greviously wrong dendrochronology is (as you have claimed), , the tendancy to quote from websites I have shown you on multiple previous occasions to be repositories and examples of bad science who pay their chief executives disporportionate salries for the csharitable sector, and as you decietfully or ignorantly mention IDot doctrines like 'irreducable complexity' that have been refuted with no mention of their refutation, the say-so of you and your chums is worth nothing to me.

    Go and prove something, eh? I will not indulge you in your arrogant insistence that you are right (without a gramme of evidence to prove it) and the seas of evidence produce by modren science are wrong.

    hillary_step

    Thank you, that really made me laugh

    TopHat

    You need to know about a subject you argue against. You've yet to demonstrate any 'accurate knowedge' of the subject. Keep the pretty pictures up if they make you feel happy, but neither they or the text you accompany them with do anything other than show you need to learn more about evolution before you can discuss it without making silly mistakes.

    If I were to try to give an example of how little I would need to know about theology to argue about theology as embaressingly as you do about evolution, I'd need to make claims like 'God is a Pizza'.

  • moshe
    moshe

    Recently in the news scientists announced that some fossilized dinosaur soft tissue was discovered in a bone and the dna was extracted. The closed match was to a modern chicken/bird dna. Of course, this is dismissed by pure creationists.

  • Liberty
    Liberty

    Hi hooberous,

    We can speculate from now to infinity about the "origin of life". For all we know a highly advanced alien civilization synthisized our solar system and everything in it as an experiment. Or we could have been seeded here by a cosmic Johnny Appleseed. We may even just be the charactors in an advanced being's dream and it is all an illusion. The possibilities are endless and all are equally unimportant because they are just mind games and speculations.

    For now, most of us are willing to bet on the most widley accepted form of reality that best fits our observable Universe. A clever trickster may be fooling us and all our observations may be phoney but since there is no way to know we just have to work with what we have. Common sense, reason, logic, and clear observations have served us well for many years. Pots of gold do not appear at the rainbow's end so most of us seek money in more conventional ways by working or government hand outs. We can't breath under water unaided so most of us avoid having our heads under there for more than a few minutes. We can't walk through solid rock or stick our hands in hot lava. We don't fly unaided or eat toxic substances in huge amounts because everyone who has tried these things has suffered consequences from not having their basic needs met to being severly injured or by just being dead.

    We accept a certain set of tried and true guidelines so we can extend our meager little lives and live as comfortably as possible all based upon these observable facts. I don't claim to know everything (as no human can) and I have never been around hot lava but if I'm told not to touch the hot lava all of my knowledge, observations, and experiences come together to convice me I probably should heed this sound advice. I've seen molten metal from watching welding and when it drips on a piece of wood the wood burns up and I know from other experiences that my hand isn't as tough as a piece of wood. I know what a mild burn feels like from experience and I know what meat looks like when I cook it.......But at this point I am not concerned about how hot lava got hot. Maybe a giant deep in the earth rubs big rocks together with such force that they melt or maybe the fire god melts them with his breath... but all of that is beside the point, it doesn't matter. If you can't see the giant making hot lava then it is just speculation and it doesn't solve any of my problems.

    I've already discussed with you in older threads the numerous reasons why the Bible is riddled with illogic, clearly observable falsehoods, and doesn't answer important questions correctly. Other than defending your Biblical God what purpose is served by debating your intellegent design speculations? For example, If your God already knew how to make fish breath under water then why would he make whales and dolphins breath air? Clearly not a very intellent design choice. If land life forms were always intended to live on dry land then why design them to need water? Untold billions of land animals and plants have died over the eons just because they couldn't get water....once again, not a very good design choice. Why design parasites and germs, or genetic defects? These are poor design features. If God is kind and loving why design lifeforms to kill and eat each other?

    These questions and design flaws are far more interesting than origin speculating because we can actually find the answers. Which is exactly why the Intellegent Design people avoid talking about the really important aspects of this subject. Evolution really answers these problems much more clearly and logically that I.D. does. Our world only really started to make any sense once evolution was incorperated into the scientific systems used to make observations and draw conclusions.

    In short, so what if the odds are a billion to one that chance can make an eye. The fact remains that we have eyes and there are natural explainations for how they got here which tell us much more about eye problems than just.."an intellegent designer made them". The Bible doesn't tell us how to treat eye problems nor even how the eye works but science does. When the Bible was our main knowledge source is it any surprise we were sicker, poorer, suffered more, and died earlier. Since science developed and evolution became a part of biology and medicine our lives have vastly improved. Wouldn't the opposite be the case if evolution were wrong and Intelligent Design were right?

  • Terry
    Terry

    I fought evolution tooth and nail for many reasons.

    Chief among those reasons is that it is counter-intuitive once you have been presented a simple story of a guy in the sky who made it happen who, himself, needs no beginning.

    But, really now!

    God needs no beginning? We just accept that because it involves a personage?

    Why?

    Nobody has the slightest problem accepting a complexity of that magnitude! Why?

    A gradual accumulation of (what proves to be) advantages is simpler than a doesn't-need-an-explanation Super Being.

    The argument against Evolution is an argument based on Intellectual dishonesty and/or laziness.

    I still don't LIKE the fact Evolution makes sense. I'm emotionally reticient and uncomfortable with it.

    But, hell--that doesn't make it wrong!

  • TopHat
    TopHat

    2050, It is ALL in your imagination...and my post was nothing more than to inject a little humour into a heated disscusion.

  • myelaine
    myelaine

    if humans evolved from goo...shouldn't we be finding little gooey part human things evolving somewhere? things that haven't come about through procreation. because of course the male and female have "evolved" differently they would have had to evolve at the same time in the same area and of course there would of had to be some kind of physical ummm... attraction or the male could be shmoozing a lizard, and where would that get us?

    michelle

  • Liberty
    Liberty

    Hi Michelle,

    There are in fact billions of "little gooey part human things" still out there. There are also many "gooey part human things" which still are directly a part of us. We are built from colonies of single cells. That all living things are related can clearly be seen by both structure and genetics. Sexual reproduction is a more recent development than asexual but asexual reproduction is still being practiced by billions of organisms. Hermaphroditic organisms also exist all over the planet. Hermaphrodites come with sets of both sex organs so finding mates is very easy. Our distant ancestors probably went through an hermaphroditic stage before further evolving destinct sexual forms solving your timing problem.

    Missing pieces one would predict if evolution were true are continually discovered each time strengthening the concept. In short, as new scientific discoveries are made evolution tends to make even more sense and more questions and answers fall into place. If evolution were dead wrong then new discoveries would not fit and the system would break down as proof against it became clear.

    If your post is serious I would advise taking some science classes or reading some books on the subject. You will be amazed at how fast the creationist nonsense will evaporate in the heat of scientific truth.

    Best of luck in your own search for truth

  • myelaine
    myelaine

    dear Liberty...

    thank you for your reply...science is not my thing and I haven't done any research on this at all. I can't say that I will either...I prefer to stick to topics that I have an affinity for and probably should have stayed out of this one...I will say tho, I believe that humans were created intact the way we are today, by God...and that's why the angels liked us! (Matthew 24:38/Genesis 6:1-4)

    love michelle

  • myelaine
    myelaine

    Behold the Lord has a mighty and strong one, like a tempest of hail and a destroying storm, like a flood of mighty waters overflowing, who will bring them down to the earth with His mighty hand.

    In that day the LORD of hosts will be for a crown of glory and a diadem of beauty to the remnant of His people, for a spirit of justice to him who sits in judgment, and for strength to those who turn back the battle at the gate. Isaiah 28:2, 5-6

    love michelle

  • 2050
    2050

    TopHat, point taken, unfortunately I didn't see the humour in your post. I thought you were serious.

    Michelle, thanks for pointing out those scriptures. I have now decided to reject evolution. No offence intended to anyone, (just my way of injecting humour into the disscusion). This is the picture I was trying to post before. I've been trying to get it to work for ages.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit