I didn't mean to be rude. In answer to your question: Yes! I have researched evolution THEORY, as well as relativity theory, string theory, expansion theory, and the mysteries of a womans heart. In truth, the most useful has been the part about women. I wonder why that is?
Frogleg
JoinedPosts by Frogleg
-
107
Why God Cannot Have Used Evolution....
by Shining One inhere is an article from the 'stand to reason' ministry.
this is why i evolution and creation are incompatible.
designed by chance .
-
-
-
107
Why God Cannot Have Used Evolution....
by Shining One inhere is an article from the 'stand to reason' ministry.
this is why i evolution and creation are incompatible.
designed by chance .
-
-
Frogleg
Dave,
our thread has been abscounded with, it seems. Don't run and hide behind veneer. It is "well supported by facts" ? Please, sir, list these "facts" for me, for I am curious to the quick. Your facts must not only postulate a guess, it must also disprove natural law. You are an opponent of worth, I await your response.
-
96
What has "Unintelligent Design" been observed to make?
by hooberus inmillions of complex objects (cameras, adjustable wrenches, etc.
) have been seen to come into existence under the direction/workmanship of intelligent designers.
however, despite the often even greater complexity of biologiocal systems* we are often told that only unintelligent processes can be considered as "scientific explanations" for the origin of these structures.
-
-
Frogleg
I'm too drunk to read all of those individual responses. However, this unintelligent piece of shite managed to make a particularly sweet young bundle of infinite softness come. She cooed so softly and even thanked me when it was in the receding waves of buzz. Does that count?
-
24
Did you ever go out in Field Service on Thanksgiving or Christmas morning
by pratt1 in.
i never had a problem with going door to door except for the holidays.. one, i felt like we were intruding on our neighbors who set aside time be with their loved ones.. two, it just made me feel more different and jealous that i was not celebrating the holidays with my family.. any thoughts?
-
-
Frogleg
I went out one christmas just to see what it was going to be like. I was quite surprised as everyone I met were, initially, very cordial, even somewhat appreciative. I didn't try to wave watchtowers in their faces, all I did was acknowledge that it was christmas morning and I wanted to share a scripture from the bible with them. I read the model prayer to them (I didn't figure they could argue with that) and asked their opinion of it. Most people just said that they had heard it before and started giving the advanced signs of , "...now get the f*** off my porch." so I said goodbye and left. Nobody yelled, though.
-
107
Why God Cannot Have Used Evolution....
by Shining One inhere is an article from the 'stand to reason' ministry.
this is why i evolution and creation are incompatible.
designed by chance .
-
-
Frogleg
Dave, I am not letting entropy sit over me like a wet blanket. You seem to indicate that some "scales" or other drop from my eyes by accepting evolution. The problem with it is that it is based upon too narrow of a spectrum to be declared law or reality. I can, thru the math and thru practical demonstration, prove to you, with a length of nearly pure copper wire chilled to the temperature of liquid hydrogen, that electrical resistance does not exist. Now, does this prove that electrical resistance does not exist in nature? Obviously you can't believe this because you wouldn't be having this conversation (as your computer would have to be woking by magic). It would be dumb to deduce the all-encompassing nature of electrical resistance based upon my very narrow scenario, yet evolutionists cry assurity with even less evidence.
The problem with evolution, Dave, is that it is just another part of just another religion. Evolution is as absurd, as narrow minded, as ultimately insupportable as the JW tripe I'm lately rid of, and I don't need another religion, be it organised, disorganised, or entropic. The JWs didn't teach me all that much, but a couple of things I did learn was 1. how to spot bullshit and 2. to not sit quietly as its being dispensed. Do yourself a favor and look at the "proponents" of evolution throughout history and see what their agendas were really about. You love to trash Russell and Rutherford(albeit, for very well earned reasons), why don't you apply the same scepticisim to the crackpots that came up with the Evolution wizardry? Or will you be thrown out of some club? Personnaly, I'm not much impressed with a flock of jackoffs that couldn't hack med school and somehow see similarities between chimpanzees and human beings as meaningful. Don't forget, these are the same geniuses that brought us such wonders as phrenology and canals on Mars.
DanTM,
Yes, and if you pour water on your foot, it will get wet! All things in nature have results when natural law is applied, that is what I have been saying; firther, you "proof" evolution theory by pointing to cause and effect of some arbitrary activity is the same thing as saying: The sun is round, a quarter is round, therefore the sun is a quarter.
-
107
Why God Cannot Have Used Evolution....
by Shining One inhere is an article from the 'stand to reason' ministry.
this is why i evolution and creation are incompatible.
designed by chance .
-
-
Frogleg
Dan, yes. But if you're headed where I think you are, you're going to hit the quarter/sun problem again.
Dave,
You are correct. However, it sounds like you are thinking that I am leaning towards espousing god, which I am not. I do not know if god exists, and personally, frankly, absolutely, after what I've been thru: I couldn't care less. If he does exists, then, like Dezi to Lucy, he's "got some esplainin' to do."
Entropy is NOT disorder. Entropy is a measure of disorder, or, more precise by current usage: entropy is a measure of the order of arrangement the constituant parts of an object in respect to the number of possible other ordered arrangements of the constituant parts of the same object (to the point where we are still talking about the same object). Again, what is the number of arrangements in a stack of 52 playing cards as opposed to the number of arrangements of 10 playing cards? Which has higher entropy?
My questions/doubts about evolution deal with its discarding of physical law outside of chance. Again, why is a soap bubble round? Did nature try cubic ones, and pyramids, and duodecahedrons, before it finally settled on round? No, the shape is not dictated by trial an error, but by underlying laws/principles that appear to be immutable. The round bubble is not there because it survives longer than the cubic ones, but because there simply cannot be a free-standing cubic soap bubble.
I do not discount nor trivialize your magnets in a box scenario, but, in realistic comparison, one against the other, comparing magnet arrangements in a box and bacteria (I assume you meant bacteria) feasting on each other and thereby continuing to "live" and eventually procreating is, again, saying the sun is a quarter because they are both round. But, prehaps, that is a discussion of life itself and nothing to do with evolution. My original aspect was that evolution seems to be going in the opposite direction than the rest of the universe. There is no parallel to evolution within the cosmos. There are different stars, differening arragements of matter, but there are no early attempts at galaxies that are the precursors of "better" galaxies, no earlier forms of stars that have bequeathed their "good parts" onto more robust stars, just as there are no cubic soap bubbles. Heavier elementss above iron come from supernovae, this is known, but a star with these heavier elements is no better or worse than any other star. Nature (or natual law), across the board, seems to dictate that certain things are simply, absolutely, those certain things and nothing more. The whatever (principle/law/darn good idea) that dictates a continual lowering of entropy, (which, supposedly, determines the "arrow of time") is measurable, undeniable, except, so it seems, when it comes to "life" forms. This concept of "life form" evolution doesn't make any sense, except when viewed in an historic sense as major tenet of a new religion overtaking an old religion. (One question I've always had is that if survival of the species is the big deal, then why don't I have more than one sexual organ? Now, to the smart ass who answers back: "You mean you don't?", I can only say that you are the reason I evolved a middle finger.)
-
29
DFed, more positive or negative?
by Sheepish injust musing.... from the vantage point of being "out", it seems to me that being dfed would be really, really painful, but ultimately a good thing.
(i was shunned by my family when i finally left though, so i know a little of what a dfed person goes through, although i didn't put myself through going back to meetings and being shunned) .
i was publicly reproved, and was not allowed to answer in meetings, but i was not shunned.
-
-
Frogleg
Dave,
You are correct, however, you missed an aspect. There are many, many people who stay in there because they know who they are dealing with. The droolers inside are predictable, pliable, easily conned, and a person is assured of a constant source of distraction from worrisome thoughts (like a loud stereo), and responsibilites (Satan did it, and Jehovah will fix it). Very little of the reasonings for why they are actually there have to do with any deity. It is a source of warmth to a grouping of people too stupid to learn how to build a fire.
To answer the question: neither. Ask me how I would feel if I suddenly got a message from Uganda that said that I was no longer allowed in their country.
-
39
There Are Over 6 Million Jehovah's Witnesses.....
by Honesty inwho blindly adhere to wtbts doctrines.
how can they be christians when they refuse to accept jesus as their mediator?
-
-
Frogleg
Wait a minute!!!! What about that other Rikker?
-
107
Why God Cannot Have Used Evolution....
by Shining One inhere is an article from the 'stand to reason' ministry.
this is why i evolution and creation are incompatible.
designed by chance .
-
-
Frogleg
Dan,
No, I am not assuming any particular source of energy. However, I would note that "beaming down" of energy from the sun (or nuclear bomb, heat lamp, flashlight, etc.) will NOT increase the ordered state of matter, as a matter of fact, in a general sense, it causes (exacerbates) disorder. (Which is why the f*ck I have to spend this weekend resealing my deck!) It may rearrange it, i.e. change it's state from liquid to gas, but it will not increase the entropy of the state. Now, if you want to point out that, say, an ammonia molecule is in a higher state of order than the CNOH atoms it is made of, and that the ammonia molecule was "created" by solar radiation, you would not be incorrect. But the logic of comparison with "life" objects breaks down in the same way as the classical declaring the sun a quarter, based upon the fact that both objects are round.
-
107
Why God Cannot Have Used Evolution....
by Shining One inhere is an article from the 'stand to reason' ministry.
this is why i evolution and creation are incompatible.
designed by chance .
-
-
Frogleg
Dan,
You are correct, that is what I am saying. I wouldn't necessarily term the earth as quiet or quiessecent at any particular time; however, whatever the first "life" form was, even if it was just a virus, the "life" system was a great deal more ordered (entropic) than the surrounding groupings of matter and energy. Thermodynamics, entropy, or whatever, would dictate that some external force of energy had to have been applied to "order" that matter into whatever it became. That obviously had to have happened, but its happening by pure chance is counter to all currently known and accepted laws of physics and chemistry and electricity and so forth. Does that mean that the current physical laws were the same now as when life began on Earth? Not necessarily; however, what is known about the the way the basic systems of the universe work today, at this moment, right now, the possibility of a life form beginning out of pure chance is so itty-bitty and tiny as to be virtually non-existant.