Posts by serotonin

106

There is so much evidence around us to prove an Intelligent creator.

by nicolaou in

that's an 'ever so slightly' adapted quote from tophat on another thread; http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/108341/2880755/post.ashx#2880755.

i've been really dismissive of god/s, religion, faith and the abandoning of reason but when it comes to the 'argument from design', well you just have to give it a bit more .

respect?

serotonin_wraith

It seems absurd from a design point of view that the nerves that carry information from the light-sensitive cells of the vertebrate eye are in front of, rather than behind, the light-sensitive retinal cells, but this is a consequence of the way this part of the eye develops as an outgrowth of the central nervous system (the octopus eye resembles that of mammals, but has a better arrangement, with the light-sensitive cells in front of the nerves).

-'The Independent - Science Made Simple: Evolution' booklet.

106

There is so much evidence around us to prove an Intelligent creator.

by nicolaou in

that's an 'ever so slightly' adapted quote from tophat on another thread; http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/108341/2880755/post.ashx#2880755.

i've been really dismissive of god/s, religion, faith and the abandoning of reason but when it comes to the 'argument from design', well you just have to give it a bit more .

respect?

serotonin_wraith

The human body is so well designed.

Here are my favourite features of this well designed body:

Hair falls out as we get older.

The eyes see everything upside down. The image has to be turned the right way round in the brain.

The breathing and swallowing organs are in the same place, leading to choking (to death sometimes).

Wisdom teeth.

Male nipples.

The appendix.

We have to be unconscious for a third of our lives.

Headaches.

Hiccups.

106

There is so much evidence around us to prove an Intelligent creator.

by nicolaou in

that's an 'ever so slightly' adapted quote from tophat on another thread; http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/108341/2880755/post.ashx#2880755.

i've been really dismissive of god/s, religion, faith and the abandoning of reason but when it comes to the 'argument from design', well you just have to give it a bit more .

respect?

Animals not well 'designed' die. 99% are now gone. We are left with the 1% that were 'designed' well. Except it wasn't design. That 1% just went through the right changes in order to survive their environment.

Is the lucky lottery winner designed to win? Or is it just common sense that a few people will when there are so many failed attempts?

40

God's Plan

by serotonin_wraith in

everything that happens is part of god's plan.. atheists are speaking out against religion.. therefore, this is part of god's plan.. do theists have the right to complain?.

on the flip side,.

some religious people will complain that they aren't getting special treatment (immunity from criticism, for example).. even if their complaining is a part of their god's plan (as everything is).... atheists don't believe in their god so don't actually have to pay any attention to that argument..

serotonin_wraith

The god of the Bible and I disagree on many things.

He wanted witches killed. I don't agree with that, because witches don't exist. It just means innocent people get killed.

Paul wanted women to remain quiet in churches. If he's inspired by God, I can only assume God wants women to remain quiet in churches. I see it as sexist. I don't agree with it.

God thinks slavery is okay. God thinks genocide is okay. God used to think burning animals alive was okay. God thinks if someone like Hitler repents on his deathbed and wants to follow Jesus, he gets to heaven, while someone like Anne Frank is burning merrily away because she didn't think Jesus came to save her.

Certainly if there is a god worth worshipping he will not let crimes go unpunished, don't you agree?

Luckily for me and Anne, there's no reason to think this god exists. If there was a god worth worshipping it wouldn't be so petty and unjust. There's nicer gods to choose from, and just as much chance for one of them to exist. I hope it's not fear that's keeping you a Christian deep down. A 'I'd better follow it, what if I'm wrong?' kind of attitude. That would be a shame.

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

serotonin_wraith

Of course, that dog-sized HORSE didn't provably evolve into something that wasn't a HORSE, did it?

Do zebra and donkey count?

I won't accept as conclusive evidence a very incomplete set of transitional "fossils"

alt alt alt

Click this link and find out!

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/lines/IAtransitional.shtml

Pakicetids did not look like whales at all, and resembled land mammals. However, the skulls of pakicetids have an ear region that is highly unusual in shape, and only resembles that of modern and fossil whales. These features are diagnostic for cetaceans, they are found in all cetaceans, and in no other animals. These features are the main reason why pakicetids are considered whales.

http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/whales/evolution_of_whales/

alt

Ambulocetus natans

, the 49 million year old "walking, swimming whale" discovered in Pakistan by Thewissen and team in 1992, and described in 1994-1996, is currently the oldest known saltwater cetacean. "With long hind legs and hands, but the teeth and ears of a more modern whale, this animal was on the fence between land and sea."

Incomplete? Your last post is incomplete. You haven't addressed the other transitional fossils yet.

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

serotonin_wraith

Hooberus,

My comments referred specifically to the false claim in the film that you linkerd to that: "after years of rejecting these simple steps of natural selection some creationist preachers are now embracing them"

The comment from me you underlined wasn't talking about that. To be honest, I don't have the time to go through every piece of creationist literature over the past however many years to see if they believed in natural selection before a certain date. I really don't know. They either did or they didn't. It doesn't change natural selection. If you have a problem with that statement, I suggest you take it up with the maker of the video. For the sake or argument, let's call it a mistake, even a lie! Are you clinging on to that to refuse to look at what the rest of the video has to show? If creationists accept it too now, what's the problem?

For example there is the significant issue of the direction of change

Evolution is blind. What direction of change are you talking about?

Evolutionary naturalsim would have required a massive increaese in genetic informational content over this time (in order to get a bacteriologist from bacteria).

Small steps...

SW: Hey hoob, I'm 5 miles from where I was this morning.

Hoob: What?! That's a massive distance! It's impossible! On foot?!

SW: Yes. One step at a time. Add those small steps up, and voila, 5 miles!

Hoob: I refuse to believe! 5 miles is too much!

Quite silly.

Mutations are not always harmful at all. How about an insect which is born with a slightly bigger wing than others? Slightly more chance of survival, means more chance of producing offspring, means more chance of the 'bigger wing' gene being passed on. How about a mutation that gives 1% (or even less, let's say 0.05%) of a species of butterfly immunity from a disease. It goes unnoticed until the disease strikes, wiping out all the butterflies except the 0.05%. Who's left to repopulate the species? Yep, the 0.05%. When the numbers go back to normal levels, what's changed? Well now that random mutation has been passed on to them all, and they all have the immunity.

Most of the time, things don't work out, and this is why 99% of all species that have ever lived are now extinct. Just what we'd expect.

As for no increase in genetic information, how come people are born with extra thumbs, etc? Isn't that extra genetic information being added?

Genes duplicate, and here are over 5000 examples.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez

Search for 'gene duplication'.

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

serotonin_wraith

Now this is interesting Auldsoul. You can accept a dog-like animal evolved into the modern horse when presented with different transitional fossils in the correct order, yet you won't accept pakitecus evolved into the modern whale, when presented with different transitional fossils in the correct order. Please explain the animals that look half pakitecus, half modern whale. Please don't tell me this is your position...!

Are you saying all these animals leading to whales were really seperately designed? It's just a coincidence that the ones with long legs on land went extinct before the ones with legs half that size, who went extinct before the whales with only small parts of legs (funny design there, a useless leg bone), who went extinct before modern whales, who were really around at the same time as all these other animals, even though there's no proof in the fossil record of this?

Consider the tiktaalik. http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/060501_tiktaalik

Technically it was a fish, so can you explain how it also happened to have features found in amphibians, and it can be dated to the time between fishes and the earliest amphibians we've found?

Tiktaalik had fins with thin ray bones, scales, and gills like most fish; however, it also had the sturdy wrist bones, neck, shoulders, and thick ribs of a four-legged vertebrate.

You made a mistake earlier too. I almost missed it. You wrote:

The cichlid fish did not become largemouth bass or rainbow trout or sharks

Quite right. Evolution says nothing of the kind. Modern animals do not evolve into other modern animals. It would be like someone giving birth to their cousin. That's right, all animals alive today are distant cousins of each other. How can you knock evolution when you don't even know what it teaches?

Here's another transitional fossil for you. Archaeopteryx.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx

Despite its small size, broad wings, and ability to fly, Archaeopteryx has more in common with small
theropod dinosaurs than it does with modern birds . In particular, it shares the following features with the deinonychosaurs ( dromaeosaurs and troodontids ): jaws with sharp teeth, three fingers with claws, a long bony tail, hyperextensible second toes ("killing claw"), feathers (which also suggest homeothermy ), and various skeletal features.
The features above make Archaeopteryx the first clear candidate for a
transitional fossil between dinosaurs and birds. [1][2][3] Thus, Archaeopteryx plays an important role not only in the study of the origin of birds but in the study of dinosaurs.

That's what wiki (and many other sites) have to say about it. What do you make of it? Is it 'just a bird'? 'Just a dinosaur'? Looks half dinosaur, half modern bird to me. It's been dated to the correct time too - between theropod dinosaurs and more modern looking bird fossils. How do you explain that? Well you wanted proof from the fossil record. There's plenty more where that came from, but I'd like to see what you make of the ones here first.

40

God's Plan

by serotonin_wraith in

everything that happens is part of god's plan.. atheists are speaking out against religion.. therefore, this is part of god's plan.. do theists have the right to complain?.

on the flip side,.

some religious people will complain that they aren't getting special treatment (immunity from criticism, for example).. even if their complaining is a part of their god's plan (as everything is).... atheists don't believe in their god so don't actually have to pay any attention to that argument..

serotonin_wraith

I'm accountable for my own actions. It's been working out quite well. I consider myself a good person. Thanks for asking.

365

Richard Dawkins Gets "Expelled" by Ben Stein!

by Perry in

i just got back from seeing the new movie release "expelled" which is a documentary exposing the militant culture of supression regarding intelligent design in the scientific community.

in a "million years", i never would have imagined that ben stein could get the author of "the god delusion", richard dawkins to speak favorably about i.d.

(intellignet design).

serotonin_wraith

Well, you must think this-

alt

or if you prefer the fossil, this-

alt

is still one of these-

Incredible! The pakitecus was still a whale! Seriously, how much does a species have to change for you to accept this?

How about if I showed you links between dinosaurs and birds? Don't tell me! I think I know your response. The birds are still dinosaurs!

36

What is the best way to help Fundamentalist Literalist Christians...

by BurnTheShips in

i would like to discuss what is the best way to help fundamentalist literalist christians lower their guard and embrace science as it reveals the physical world to us?.

of course the key scientific teaching that causes a sticking point is evolution, not to mention other things such as the age of the universe.. burn.

.

serotonin_wraith

As long as they believe Jesus came to redeem us from a fallen world, caused by man, evolution is only going to say to them the world was in its sorry state long before man evolved. Pain and suffering would have to be how God designed things from the start, before any sin. Life killing life to survive, pain in childbirth, and so on. They'd be right too.

Education in youth will probably help most people, and always presenting refutations whenever we see creationist arguments. Most people don't accept evolution because they don't know what it is.

serotonin_wraith

Posts by serotonin_wraith