Posts by WhatshallIcallmyself

340

Calling Cofty and others regarding evolution

by dubstepped in

jw
friends

so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.

i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.

i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.

WhatshallIcallmyself

"okay I am confused. you say evolution do explain the origin of thought; @Coded Logic say evolution should not explain the origin of thought and wikipedia treat it as an unsolved problem." - Hot.

Evolutionary theory does explain the origin of thought. We all share a common ancestor and over time what we describe as 'thought' has evolved to what we see today. Remember what a scientific theory is and what it is not...

Evolutionary theory does not have to explain the origin of thought. The theory works anyway, even if we don't know everything yet.

The origin of thought has not yet been solved...

All 3 are accurate statements.

"Perhaps you too should write to wikipedia and provide your solution for how thought evolved?" - Hot.

Perhaps you should try to understand what a scientific theory is...

340

Calling Cofty and others regarding evolution

by dubstepped in

jw
friends

so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.

i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.

i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.

WhatshallIcallmyself

"I don't say evolution cannot explain thought in principle. I don't say thought proves evolution wrong. I say evolution RIGHT NOW don't explain the origin of thought well." - HB

Again, either you aren't explaining yourself in a manner that can accurately communicate to us your thoughts, or you still do not understand what a scientific theory is.

At the moment evolutionary theory does 'explain' the origin of thoughts in a satisfactory manner. By satisfactory I mean that it remains in harmony with known parameters and the predictions it makes with regards to this subject is verified by findings from various branches of inquiry; not all of which are tasked with looking at the emergence of thought directly.

However, and this is important, evolutionary theory in and of itself does not prove anything... It is the basis of a set of ideas that can then be tested. It is those more specific ideas that are shown to be true of false.

What is evolutionary theory (or the Theory of Evolution)? It is the idea that all the extant life on earth share a common ancestor and that all extant life has evolved from that common ancestor; in other words it simply offers an explanation of the diversity of life around us. From that simple idea stems all the knowledge we now have on this subject and that knowledge (based on scientific enquiry) supports the theory.

340

Calling Cofty and others regarding evolution

by dubstepped in

jw
friends

so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.

i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.

i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.

WhatshallIcallmyself

"evolutionary theory on the other hand have no explanation for a bunch of stuff, like the origin of thought." - HB

Are you sure? ... Also, you have to remember the explanatory power of evolutionary theory as it exists. You cannot throw the whole concept aside because you have managed to point to something you either do not know or it hasn't yet explained. If that was the case science wouldn't get anywhere because nothing would be considered explained.

"But u can't equate evolution to something like the standard model bc there are so many things about evolution we still don't know because it happened a billion years ago." - HB

It is amazing how much of an opinion you can have on something you clearly still do not understand. I'll give a hint: evolution is still happening now... Or are you confusing evolution with origin of life studies?

The geological landscape formed over billions of years and yet we can still say with certainty how it came about because the same geological processes are still happening now.

41

How to Argue for Creationism

by cofty in

all creationist arguments follow an identical pattern.. first a quick way to remember the format - 'complexity, complexity, complexity; therefore god'.. now a more detailed guide to formulating an argument.. identify some complex feature of the natural world.

a quick google search or nature documentary will quickly provide inspiration.

creationist websites have hundreds of them you can copy-paste without attribution.. do no research at all on what is currently known about the evolutionary history of this feature.

WhatshallIcallmyself

"Interesting thought. Is this similar to the "chicken or the egg" enigma?" - O.N.

No. 'Monkeys' were around long before Humans. The common ancestor of both existed long before that.

"...so is Creation [obvious] to those who comprehend." - O.N.

Have you seen creatures pop into existence? Has god popped down and shown you how it is done? If not, you have no way of comprehending any such thing. All you have done is shown that you think that because something is 'complex' in your mind then your favourite god must have made it for....reasons...

41

How to Argue for Creationism

by cofty in

all creationist arguments follow an identical pattern.. first a quick way to remember the format - 'complexity, complexity, complexity; therefore god'.. now a more detailed guide to formulating an argument.. identify some complex feature of the natural world.

a quick google search or nature documentary will quickly provide inspiration.

creationist websites have hundreds of them you can copy-paste without attribution.. do no research at all on what is currently known about the evolutionary history of this feature.

WhatshallIcallmyself

Perhaps we could just respond to the usual creationist nonsense with a list of numbers representing which mistakes they are making at that particular time. It shouldn't require a long list of options because most creationists do not bring any originality to the table.

60

Jesus fulfilling old testament prophecies like his legs not being broken

by Isambard Crater in

what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.

i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..

WhatshallIcallmyself

myelaine -

The crux of this thread, as far as I was aware, was that some things still make some of us think "hmmm, maybe...".

Therefore, pointing out that all these thoughts are based on a demonstrably fictional book, full of fictional ideas, is extremely relevant...

60

Jesus fulfilling old testament prophecies like his legs not being broken

by Isambard Crater in

what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.

i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..

WhatshallIcallmyself

"Mylaine - there is no such thing as sin." - Cofty

And therein lays the end of the Judeo-Christian beliefs...

There was no Adam or Eve, the world wide flood didn't happen etc. Therefore we know this nonsense about sin is just a story that the uninformed like to believe is true.

340

Calling Cofty and others regarding evolution

by dubstepped in

jw
friends

so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.

i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.

i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.

WhatshallIcallmyself

"Let’s take a different line of argument"

How about they stop trying to put together 'clever' arguments and actually do some research? Aside from the fact that they would quickly realise that most of their objections have plausible answers already that do not rely on special pleading (too complex to just come about by chance yet designed by my favourite god that just came about by chance is just fine), they would hopefully quickly realise the depth of their own ignorance and perhaps might stop flapping their lips just long enough for them to learn something...

340

Calling Cofty and others regarding evolution

by dubstepped in

jw
friends

so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.

i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.

i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.

WhatshallIcallmyself

"It argues that there would be no use for two sets of fangs that are incomplete, or some intermediary stage, therefore they must always have existed fully formed."

What would a vegetarian, family friendly, pre-fall black mamba need with these teeth? Did it need them to tackle some tough grass?

Why can't creationists see their own logical inconsistencies? The Mamba was either designed to be a killer which falsifies the assertion that all creatures were vegetarian before the fall, or it was peaceful and it evolved after the fall to be the killer it now is, falsifying the assertion the it could not have evolved such an elaborate set of teeth!

340

Calling Cofty and others regarding evolution

by dubstepped in

jw
friends

so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.

i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.

i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.

WhatshallIcallmyself

"a. Who wrote the codes for DNA?"

You presume a 'who' is needed. It's elephants all the way down; who wrote the 'code' for the designer of our DNA? And who coded that particular coder, ad infinitum.

"b. When did humans become sentient?"

That is a good question but it is not relevant for the premise that "Their[sic] are nearly insurmountable "problems" with the evolution doctrine", non sequitur.

"c. Why do we desire to create and repair and emotionally "connect?""

That is a good question but it is not relevant for the premise that "Their[sic] are nearly insurmountable "problems" with the evolution doctrine", non sequitur.

"and literally thousands of other questions regarding life and all of its incredible diversity."

And I wonder just how many of your objections are irrelevant to evolutionary theory, rely on a misunderstanding of evolutionary theory or raise questions that have already been answered by evolutionary theory.

"To my way of thinking, after evaluating the tiniest of details, there is only one answer."

GIGO...