sizemik

Joined

• started 145 topics
• posted 5,292 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by sizemik

• 
  85

  Did Life Originate By Chance or Intelligent Design? Or is There a Third Option?

  by JimmyPage in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when discussing the argument of how life originated the wt always boils it down to being chance vs. intelligent design.. no scientist in their right mind believes it happened by chance.

  nor do most scientists believe that life is a product of god.. there is a solution that the wt completely ignores and that is... natural selection.. how many here who believe in a creator have honestly examined what natural selection really is?.

  (i've been reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins and was very surprised when i came to the chapter that actually mentions the watchtower society's arguments for intelligent design.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  Precisely. He really does not emphasize process. But as a naturalist and a Botanist, he well knows that any science needs the riggor of proof and an established repeatable process for verification. That is his main intent (even though I feel he does not succeed) in explaining the "delusion" of god by some means, either the moth suicidal instinct, memes or whatever. . . . Etude

  Thank you for conceeding that . . . but now you've widened the issue . . . it doesn't change the fact that the quote you used did not mean what you claimed. He not only doesn't emphasis process . . . he simply doesn't mention it at all. You can still make your point without language manipulation . . . the very thing you highlighted.
• 
  85

  Did Life Originate By Chance or Intelligent Design? Or is There a Third Option?

  by JimmyPage in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when discussing the argument of how life originated the wt always boils it down to being chance vs. intelligent design.. no scientist in their right mind believes it happened by chance.

  nor do most scientists believe that life is a product of god.. there is a solution that the wt completely ignores and that is... natural selection.. how many here who believe in a creator have honestly examined what natural selection really is?.

  (i've been reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins and was very surprised when i came to the chapter that actually mentions the watchtower society's arguments for intelligent design.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  You're confusing metaphors instead of paying attention to the logic behind the statements. Dawkins and others who make such statements use the "fact" that we are here as "proof" that we evolved . . . Etude

  Really. There is no reference to evolution in the statement you quoted. Dawkins is commenting on "origins" not process. Your interpretation requires an extrapolation of the statement based on what Dawkins believes about evolution, outside of the quote you offered. so you are now using projection as well.

  "The fact that we are here proves that we are here", . . . Etude

  Go back and read your post . . . Dawkins is saying simply that the fact that we are here proves we must have originated somehow.

  But you're the one who offered the analogy and now wishes to defend it. Very well . . . carry on.
• 
  85

  Did Life Originate By Chance or Intelligent Design? Or is There a Third Option?

  by JimmyPage in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when discussing the argument of how life originated the wt always boils it down to being chance vs. intelligent design.. no scientist in their right mind believes it happened by chance.

  nor do most scientists believe that life is a product of god.. there is a solution that the wt completely ignores and that is... natural selection.. how many here who believe in a creator have honestly examined what natural selection really is?.

  (i've been reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins and was very surprised when i came to the chapter that actually mentions the watchtower society's arguments for intelligent design.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  "Just as we did with the Goldilocks orbits, we can make the point that, however improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here." . . . Dawkins

  It's like saying: "The streets are wet, therefore it must have rained because when it rains the streets become wet." . . . Etude

  No it's not . . . Dawkins makes no comment whatsoever on the origin of the water (life) as in "it must have rained"

  But what you've posted is a prime example of languge manipulation . . . on this occasion using a false analogy.

  What Dawkins is in effect saying is "The streets are wet . . . therefore we know water exists and must have on origin."
• 
  699

  A truce between Atheists and Non-Atheists?

  by palmtree67 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ricky gervais tweeted this 11/14/12 and i totally agree with it:.

  "there are good atheists and bad atheists.

  there are good believers and bad believers.. no god has ever changed that.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  stir people up and galvanize the flock by the critisism, along with making sure she is in the center of everything all the time. Im not claiming its a cult, but it is a way of creating an us vs them situation. . . . bohm

  The persecution complex must be regularly fed . . . that's why Freddie dreamed up his no-blood policy. It requires controversy and polarisation . . . after a while, as an "us", you begin to see it everywhere.
• 
  85

  Did Life Originate By Chance or Intelligent Design? Or is There a Third Option?

  by JimmyPage in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when discussing the argument of how life originated the wt always boils it down to being chance vs. intelligent design.. no scientist in their right mind believes it happened by chance.

  nor do most scientists believe that life is a product of god.. there is a solution that the wt completely ignores and that is... natural selection.. how many here who believe in a creator have honestly examined what natural selection really is?.

  (i've been reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins and was very surprised when i came to the chapter that actually mentions the watchtower society's arguments for intelligent design.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  DP (hehe)
• 
  85

  Did Life Originate By Chance or Intelligent Design? Or is There a Third Option?

  by JimmyPage in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when discussing the argument of how life originated the wt always boils it down to being chance vs. intelligent design.. no scientist in their right mind believes it happened by chance.

  nor do most scientists believe that life is a product of god.. there is a solution that the wt completely ignores and that is... natural selection.. how many here who believe in a creator have honestly examined what natural selection really is?.

  (i've been reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins and was very surprised when i came to the chapter that actually mentions the watchtower society's arguments for intelligent design.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  Is a virus really a "living thing"? It's little more than a complex collection of compounds within a membrane with the ability to sense it's environment, utilise resources (another living thing which it is often exclusively dependent on), and the ability to replicate. It has no brain or nueral system. It has none of the five senses we possess. It has no circulation system and doesn't breathe. So is it really living?
• 
  85

  Did Life Originate By Chance or Intelligent Design? Or is There a Third Option?

  by JimmyPage in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when discussing the argument of how life originated the wt always boils it down to being chance vs. intelligent design.. no scientist in their right mind believes it happened by chance.

  nor do most scientists believe that life is a product of god.. there is a solution that the wt completely ignores and that is... natural selection.. how many here who believe in a creator have honestly examined what natural selection really is?.

  (i've been reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins and was very surprised when i came to the chapter that actually mentions the watchtower society's arguments for intelligent design.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  although species have been stable for a long time. . . . . prologos

  They haven't really . . . it just appears that way through the tiny window of human history. Right now we are seeing the greatest mass-extinction since the end of the Cretaceous period 65M years ago. Biodiversity in the oceans has decreased by as much as 50% in some areas. Species are disappearing at a rate of 15 per day by conservative estimates, over 30 per day by others. It's hard to measure . . . but most agree that it is accelerating sharply. The consumptive behaviour of humans is a big feature in the trend.
• 
  85

  Did Life Originate By Chance or Intelligent Design? Or is There a Third Option?

  by JimmyPage in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when discussing the argument of how life originated the wt always boils it down to being chance vs. intelligent design.. no scientist in their right mind believes it happened by chance.

  nor do most scientists believe that life is a product of god.. there is a solution that the wt completely ignores and that is... natural selection.. how many here who believe in a creator have honestly examined what natural selection really is?.

  (i've been reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins and was very surprised when i came to the chapter that actually mentions the watchtower society's arguments for intelligent design.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  Q . . . thanks for posting the video. I've posted it here before.

  The truth is that Natural Selection DOES operate at a molecular and compound level. Lifelike behaviours are observed in simple compounds . . . environment awareness, utilisation of resources and self replication all occur. Compounds that combine to form greater complexity take on new behaviours, and are better equipped to survive in their environment . . . by Natural Selection and what could be described as non-genetic mutation.

  The threshold to organic life is simply an imaginary line in the sand, drawn on a continuum, from an over-simplified human concept. It's an illusion. Matter possesses the same factors for survival . . . from the simplest molecules to the most complex "living" things

  Sorry EP . . . but you may not have this one right.
• 
  699

  A truce between Atheists and Non-Atheists?

  by palmtree67 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ricky gervais tweeted this 11/14/12 and i totally agree with it:.

  "there are good atheists and bad atheists.

  there are good believers and bad believers.. no god has ever changed that.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  When you say "Just respect and love everyone" it kind of sounds like you just want to be patted on the head when you share a thought, and just want to be listened to without any challenges.

  Criticism of content should be delivered and accepted without it being delivered or taken as personal. We all hold personal beliefs of some nature . . . when we share them . . . we must accept that differing views will be expressed. Criticism should not be seen as negative . . . it's simply a counter argument and if that is stifled, then the value of these discussions is devalued. Obviously ad hominem (which comes in many forms) is at the heart of it . . . it derails and kills threads . . . and just chases people away. If something is logical and compelling, with supporting evidence, we can't be lazy . . . validity should be acknowledged . . . even if it runs counter to our position, it's still food for thought.

  Hi Psac . . . nice points. More good points made all round . . . a worthwhile discussion, for the willing at least.
• 
  699

  A truce between Atheists and Non-Atheists?

  by palmtree67 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ricky gervais tweeted this 11/14/12 and i totally agree with it:.

  "there are good atheists and bad atheists.

  there are good believers and bad believers.. no god has ever changed that.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  A truce is best served by clarifying the rules of polite and constructive engagement . . . and identifying and avoiding the threats to it. Everyone is different, but it's still possible to move closer to what is more livable for all. There's been several good comments to that end. Worth absorbing.