evolution question

by outsmartthesystem 165 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  JonathanH
• 

  cofty

  gb - you made an assertion that is just plain wrong.

  I explained in detail why it was wrong.

  You ignored it and asserted the same nonsense all over again

  Do you understand that there is nothing in the chemical makeup of DNA that demands certain chemical reactions?

  I have no interest in wasting any more time, carry on with your fantasies.
• 

  gubberningbody

  Jonathan / Cofty

  What we both understand is that a living system is alive and chemical reactions take place in living systems in support of the same.

  What your reasoning points to, however, is that "life" is nothing other than an epiphenomenon of chemical and physical processes and to say that something is "alive" is to engage in, for want of better terminology - anthropomorphization.

  There is no "art" in this thinking, no intention, only chemicals on surfaces.

  Of course it certainly "appears" to me that there is "mind" in all these sorts of things and that you both "appear" to agree as I observe your epiphenomenas at work.

  But it does seem that there are some internally inconsistent practices which you both engage in. These exemplified well in two quotes of Francis Crick:

  1. Almost all aspects of life are engineered at the molecular level, and without understanding molecules we can only have a very sketchy understanding of life itself.

  — Francis Crick 2. Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.

  — Francis Crick
• 

  donny

  We have interbred with Neanderthals. My wife reminds me of that weekly.
• 

  Caedes

  GB,

  You still haven't answered either of my questions, my questions are not "wrong" since my questions are merely attempting to get you to explain what you are asserting in more detail. You have failed to do this.

  I suspect that you are engaging in Deepak Chopra style waffling in a vain attempt to blind other readers to a serious lack of substance to your assertions.

  Interestingly when I have talked to people who really understand their subject they have no difficulty in putting technical detail in laymans terms.
• 

  cofty

  I suspect that you are engaging in Deepak Chopra style waffling in a vain attempt to blind other readers to a serious lack of substance to your assertions.

  I suspect you are right. Anybody who puts "epiphenomenon" and "anthropomorphization" in the same sentence is bluffing.

  If you can't explain your ideas to your granny you don't really understand them.
• 

  EntirelyPossible

  I have to say, I haven't been posting a lot, but I am enjoying this thread. I just don't have the energy for the debate lately. Women, whisky and work have been consuming all my time.
• 

  NewChapter

  LOL---sounds more fun than yet another evolution debate EP.

  NC
• 

  gubberningbody

  donny, that's actually true. It is at least so of Europeans.
• 

  NewChapter

  Yes, that is true and absolutely fascinating. Modern humans were genetically close enough to interbreed, which by the definition of biological species, makes them the same species but perhaps a different sub-species. Some anthropologists are now listing modern humans as H. sapiens sapiens and Neanderthal as H. sapiens neandertalensis.

  It's kind of mind blowing. This idea that modern humans are special and there was never anything like us is really being challenged. The Genesis account is really being challenged. Also, neanderthal buried their dead and used limited symbolism. They probably had a spiritual side, because of the way they handled graves. They must have believed in a spiritual life to put simple stone tools in with the dead.

  NC