Name one piece of evidence? And by that, I mean evidence that was predicted that specifically points to a god with very specific properties with no other explanation.
Design or Non-Design, finally we know, Darwin's Doubt
by QC 371 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
cofty
the Cambrian Explosion (big bang creation of life)
Still avoiding reading books I see.
-
Jon Preston
QC--i understand your warning. But to say evolution isnt part of our planet and developments, adaptations, mutations--is just plain and blind ignorance.
-
OnTheWayOut
I don't pretend to follow these endless debates anymore. I just put my 2 cents in here and there when I feel like it. Regardless of where this current convo. has gone, I wanted to throw in the words from Neil degrasse Tyson from episode 2 of the new COSMOS:
"Some claim that evolution is just a theory, as if it were merely an opinion. The theory of evolution -- like the theory of gravity -- is a scientific fact. Evolution really happened. Accepting our kinship with all life on Earth is not only solid science. In my view, it’s also a soaring spiritual experience."
-
QC
WayOut: Words from Neil DeGrasse Tyson, " The theory of evolution -- like the theory of gravity -- is a scientific fact."
Eyes can’t see what the mind doesn’t know, and ears can’t hear what the mind doesn’t know.
Bottom line? Many are not ready, YET , to see or hear (understand) how it is that Evolution is flat out wrong.
But this time will come for everyone.
Just like we all came to understand (got past our cognitive dissonance) how it is JWs are wrong.
(Yes, DeGrasse, Dawkins, Hawking, Darwin, Maher, Jon Stewart and cofty, etc., are all wrong! Evolution is not a SCIENTIFIC fact; Monkeys, Apes, Trilobites, single cells, etc... don’t morph into humans, EVER. )
-
Apognophos
When I stopped believing as a JW, one of the major lessons that I learned was that I had gained no special, intimate knowledge of how the universe worked from reading the Bible. I really knew almost nothing about even the Bible itself because I had not been reading scholarly writings and contrasting opinions on the Bible, only the WT literature.
I had really enjoyed thinking that my little group on the fringe of society could know more about the universe than the general populace and the mainstream scientific community, but alas, I had to give up that delusion of superiority and acknowledge that I had been refusing to educate myself on things that contradicted with my beliefs. It's been humbling for me, but exciting too.
Unfortunately, some people take longer than others to throw off the conditioning that JWs have special knowledge....
-
Viviane
Eyes can’t see what the mind doesn’t know, and ears can’t hear what the mind doesn’t know.
Bottom line? Many are not ready, YET , to see or hear (understand) how it is that Evolution is flat out wrong.
Meaningless platitudes and bad logic.
(Yes, DeGrasse, Dawkins, Hawking, Darwin, Maher, Jon Stewart and cofty, etc., are all wrong! Evolution is not a SCIENTIFIC fact; Monkeys, Apes, Trilobites, single cells, etc... don’t morph into humans, EVER. )
You are correct, they don't. That's not how evolution works. Education....you need some of it.
-
OnTheWayOut
Y'all see why I don't stay with these threads anymore?
QC- Monkeys, Apes, Trilobites, single cells, etc... don’t morph into humans, EVER.
Yes, very true. But that doesn't make the facts of evolution wrong. It makes your understanding of evolution wrong. No monkey has ever morphed into a human and your way of saying it is exactly what COSMOS addressed. It seems that some humans think we would be less than we are if we are the product of evolution.Maybe this (from http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html) will help you:
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step—known as a theory—in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.When used in non-scientific context, the word “theory” implies that something is unproven or speculative. As used in science, however, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. In the scientific method, there is a clear distinction between facts, which can be observed and/or measured, and theories, which are scientists’ explanations and interpretations of the facts. Scientists can have various interpretations of the outcomes of experiments and observations, but the facts, which are the cornerstone of the scientific method, do not change.
A theory must include statements that have observational consequences. A good theory, like Newton’s theory of gravity, has unity, which means it consists of a limited number of problem-solving strategies that can be applied to a wide range of scientific circumstances. Another feature of a good theory is that it formed from a number of hypotheses that can be tested independently.
A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. Theories can be improved or modified as more information is gathered so that the accuracy of the prediction becomes greater over time.
Theories are foundations for furthering scientific knowledge and for putting the information gathered to practical use. Scientists use theories to develop inventions or find a cure for a disease.
A few theories do become laws, but theories and laws have separate and distinct roles in the scientific method. A theory is an explanation of an observed phenomenon, while a law is a description of an observed phenomenon.
So the theory of evolution can be proven wrong or modified. But that means that some of the details cannot be proven until you invent the time machine, and some of the details may indeed be wrong. But evolution is a fact. Neil degrasse Tyson must have been talking right to you (QC) when he stated my quote in the earlier post.
-
cofty
I lose IQ points every time I read QC's latest brain-farts
-
QC
How is it that the human body instantly has this gorgeous sophisticated physiologic G-suit mechanism (i.e. tolerate up to 3–5 g’s, ever since man began to fly, in 1903), no time for “natural selection” piecemeal antecedents (gradualism predicted by Evolution)?
Proving environmental pressure did not craft this G-suit capacity. It's design by a genius.
In the market place of ideas, science drives ANOTHER nail in the coffin of Darwinism:
“A Biological G-Suit
…Humans have baroreceptors in the sinuses of the carotid arteries that detect changes in blood (hydraulic) pressure. If these receptors detect a sudden drop in pressure, they emit a signal to the brainstem via the glossopharengeal nerve. After several connections and pathways, some excitatory and some inhibitory, activity of the sympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system increases and constricts the arteries (vasoconstriction) in the bilateral lower extremities.
And like the air bladders in a pilot’s g-suit, this constriction impedes the flow of arterial blood traveling down the body and forces the blood in the upper arterial system higher into the neck and head, thus avoiding syncope. 1 Sound familiar? Additionally, the heart is signaled to beat faster, thereby increasing cardiac output.
A Result of Evolution—or Design?
Such a complex integrated function presents a challenge to Darwinian evolution, which requires generating such a system in a piecemeal fashion. However, without the detectors (baroreceptors), the regulators (command and control), the integrators (neural communication systems), the actuators (the muscularized arteries and adjustable heart rate), and the necessity (maintaining consciousness/perfusion to the brain) all at the same time and in the same organism—and all of it working at a velocity suitable to the condition/stimulus (defined performance specifications)—then the function cannot work. To draw from biochemist Michael Behe, the human body’s g-suit function is “irreducibly complex.” But the evolutionary mystery only gets deeper.
Another enormous difficulty for the evolutionary paradigm is the fact that humans demonstrate a physiologic capacity (to tolerate up to 3–5 g’s) that is useful to us now, but which theoretically evolved without an environmental pressure to enable or “guide” natural selection. How then can strictly naturalistic processes account for the human organism evolving or adapting such a function to begin with? We do not experience high dynamic states except as an artifact of the modern Western industrial revolution. To have evolved this capacity seems impossible.
A simple solution to this conundrum posits design by an intelligent creator with foreknowledge of the experiences that humans would encounter in their later history as a species. After all, we know that the g-suit created for aviators required thought, planning, and design by human agents. Both the very existence of humanity’s built-in g-suit function and the function’s irreducible complexity make much better sense from a creation model perspective.” http://tnrtb.wordpress.com/2014/04/28/humanitys-built-in-g-suit-a-product-of-evolution-or-creation/
By Dr. Eddy M. del Rio, received his MD from Saint Louis University
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJKuKEnubf4 (4 min)
WayOut: Y'all see why I don't stay with these threads anymore?
It's OK, you'll be fine. You're bit confused.
Note x-dub must see: Darwin’s Dilemma, Cambrian explosion up close, you are there (prior page 16).
This is the definitive documentary on the recent Cambrian Explosion finds. Evolution Paleontologist Simmon Conway Morris is one of its narrators.
Outstanding!