Posts: 66529
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 4:22 pm
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2016 at 4:24 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(January 13, 2016 at 4:14 pm)AAA Wrote: Please explain the phrase arguing from ignorance then, and why I am doing it Use your google fu. You probably ought to have figured that out before you offered your comments regarding evolution in these many preceding pages. Now, like every creatard before you, you would like to pretend that we have not had a lengthy discussion including this very topic in those very same preceding pages.
(January 13, 2016 at 4:16 pm)AAA Wrote: Why am I not a science student? Because I don't accept neo-darwinian evolution as the complete account to life and its diversity? Might have something to do with your ignorance of basic principles of science, and fundamental concepts in biology. But yeah....in fact....it is precisely because of your comment directly above as well....though probably not in the manner that's just crossed your god addled brain.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 2292
Threads: 16
Joined: September 28, 2015
Reputation:
24
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 4:22 pm
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2016 at 4:28 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
(January 13, 2016 at 4:16 pm)AAA Wrote: (January 13, 2016 at 2:42 pm)Beccs Wrote: Burger prep counts as science, right?
Why am I not a science student? Because I don't accept neo-darwinian evolution as the complete account to life and its diversity?
No, it's because you're under the apprehension that scientists accept evolution as "the complete account to life and its diversity".
I am John Cena's hip-hop album.
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 4:38 pm
(January 13, 2016 at 4:22 pm)Rhythm Wrote: (January 13, 2016 at 4:14 pm)AAA Wrote: Please explain the phrase arguing from ignorance then, and why I am doing it Use your google fu. You probably ought to have figured that out before you offered your comments regarding evolution in these many preceding pages. Now, like every creatard before you, you would like to pretend that we have not had a lengthy discussion including this very topic in those very same preceding pages.
(January 13, 2016 at 4:16 pm)AAA Wrote: Why am I not a science student? Because I don't accept neo-darwinian evolution as the complete account to life and its diversity? Might have something to do with your ignorance of basic principles of science, and fundamental concepts in biology. But yeah....in fact....it is precisely because of your comment directly above as well....though probably not in the manner that's just crossed your god addled brain.
It isn't the absence of evidence for abiogenesis that makes me reject neo-darwinian evolution, it is the positive indicators of a designed system coupled with the flaws in evolution that form the argument. NOT an argument from ignorance.
Can religious people be scientists in your mind? Why are you so hostile to religious people? Name calling is what you in particular have resorted to this whole time.
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 4:40 pm
(January 13, 2016 at 4:22 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: (January 13, 2016 at 4:16 pm)AAA Wrote: Why am I not a science student? Because I don't accept neo-darwinian evolution as the complete account to life and its diversity?
No, it's because you're under the apprehension that scientists accept evolution as "the complete account to life and its diversity".
What do you mean? If your going to go on about how abiogenesis and evolution are two different things, then look at how I used neo-darwinian evolution. We defined that earlier as a less cartoonish way to convey the molecules to man hypothesis that I suspect you believe.
Posts: 66529
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 4:50 pm
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2016 at 4:53 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(January 13, 2016 at 4:38 pm)AAA Wrote: It isn't the absence of evidence for abiogenesis that makes me reject neo-darwinian evolution, Good, since absence of evidence for abiogenesis would say precisely -nothing- about evolution.
Quote:it is the positive indicators of a designed system coupled with the flaws in evolution that form the argument. NOT an argument from ignorance.
Those "positive indicators" being non-existent, and those "flaws" being that you can't imagine or don't understand how something that demonstrably does work...works.
Quote:Can religious people be scientists in your mind?
They clearly can...most of them manage to find a way to square their faiths away with the fact of evolution, and the theory of evolution. You, though..probably not...you seem to be incapable.
Quote:Why are you so hostile to religious people? Name calling is what you in particular have resorted to this whole time.
When I see an asshole, I call him an asshole. It's only incidental that you happen to be a religious asshole. You made a grandiose claim in an effort to establish your credibility....the trouble with the claim was it's transparency..as soon as you opened your mouth to comment further. You're now doubling and tripling down on that claim.......asshole.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 2292
Threads: 16
Joined: September 28, 2015
Reputation:
24
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 5:03 pm
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2016 at 6:58 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
(January 13, 2016 at 4:11 pm)AAA Wrote: So you think that the universe is eternal? I believe most scientist think that it had a beginning. This means that it must have been caused by something else. And exactly, the first cause must have been uncaused, which is outside of our experience. The difference between you and I is that you think the first cause was unintelligent and I think it was intelligent. I wasn't asserting anything in the last post, those were just some thoughts. I even said that I know that they weren't scientific ideas. I didn't say that this is 100% right, it was just a thought.
And the higher dimensional deity becomes comprehendable and personable when It interacts with our dimension. God has allegedly interacted (at least according to the Bible, which I know you don't care about) many times throughout history. This is when He becomes personable. Again these are just thoughts, so I don't want to see you respond telling me that I am asserting them to be true.
In the universe, there is cause and effect, each cause is the effect of a cause, this is time and space at work, which are functions of the universe. If the universe was caused by some other temporal-based agent "outside" of the universe, then the laws of cause and effect were somehow in place before the universe existed, the cause of the universe would have to be the effect of a previous cause, and that cause would also be an effect of a cause, the chain reaction of causality would trace backwards forever to no determinable starting point, which would mean that time and space are eternal, not infinite, which to my mind sort of breaks time and space, seeing as it makes time timeless and space spaceless. My friend, it is you who believes the universe is eternal.
I am John Cena's hip-hop album.
Posts: 2292
Threads: 16
Joined: September 28, 2015
Reputation:
24
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 5:22 pm
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2016 at 5:27 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
(January 13, 2016 at 4:40 pm)AAA Wrote: We defined that earlier as a less cartoonish way to convey the molecules to man hypothesis that I suspect you believe.
That is what I mean. I'm not questioning whether or not you're a science student, you haven't given me any reason to even entertain the possibility that you might be. You've yet to convince me that you've taken some spare time to familiarize yourself with the subject, let alone that you study it academically.
I am John Cena's hip-hop album.
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 5:40 pm
(January 13, 2016 at 5:03 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: (January 13, 2016 at 4:11 pm)AAA Wrote: So you think that the universe is eternal? I believe most scientist think that it had a beginning. This means that it must have been caused by something else. And exactly, the first cause must have been uncaused, which is outside of our experience. The difference between you and I is that you think the first cause was unintelligent and I think it was intelligent. I wasn't asserting anything in the last post, those were just some thoughts. I even said that I know that they weren't scientific ideas. I didn't say that this is 100% right, it was just a thought.
And the higher dimensional deity becomes comprehendable and personable when It interacts with our dimension. God has allegedly interacted (at least according to the Bible, which I know you don't care about) many times throughout history. This is when He becomes personable. Again these are just thoughts, so I don't want to see you respond telling me that I am asserting them to be true.
In the universe, causes lead to effects, each cause is the effect of a cause, this is time and space at work, which are functions of the universe. If the universe was caused by some other temporal-based agent "outside" of the universe, then the laws of cause and effect were somehow in place before the universe existed, the cause of the universe would have to be the effect of a previous cause, and that cause would also be an effect of a cause, the chain reaction of causality would trace backwards forever to no determinable starting point, which would mean that time and space are eternal, not infinite, which to my mind sort of breaks time and space, seeing as it makes time timeless and space spaceless. My friend, it is you who believes the universe is eternal. I think we're actually in agreement that our universe is not eternal, but I'm not sure. Wouldn't something outside of time be exempt from the need of a previous cause? Obviously we can't jump to God from that, but the God of the Bible does claim to be the creator of time and space, and therefore removes himself from the need for a previous cause.
Posts: 2292
Threads: 16
Joined: September 28, 2015
Reputation:
24
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 5:41 pm
(January 13, 2016 at 5:40 pm)AAA Wrote: (January 13, 2016 at 5:03 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: In the universe, causes lead to effects, each cause is the effect of a cause, this is time and space at work, which are functions of the universe. If the universe was caused by some other temporal-based agent "outside" of the universe, then the laws of cause and effect were somehow in place before the universe existed, the cause of the universe would have to be the effect of a previous cause, and that cause would also be an effect of a cause, the chain reaction of causality would trace backwards forever to no determinable starting point, which would mean that time and space are eternal, not infinite, which to my mind sort of breaks time and space, seeing as it makes time timeless and space spaceless. My friend, it is you who believes the universe is eternal. I think we're actually in agreement that our universe is not eternal, but I'm not sure. Wouldn't something outside of time be exempt from the need of a previous cause? Obviously we can't jump to God from that, but the God of the Bible does claim to be the creator of time and space, and therefore removes himself from the need for a previous cause.
Yeah, this is starting to seem disingenuous.
I am John Cena's hip-hop album.
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 13, 2016 at 5:50 pm
(January 13, 2016 at 5:22 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: (January 13, 2016 at 4:40 pm)AAA Wrote: We defined that earlier as a less cartoonish way to convey the molecules to man hypothesis that I suspect you believe.
That is what I mean. I'm not questioning whether or not you're a science student, you haven't given me any reason to even entertain the possibility that you might be. You've yet to convince me that you've taken some spare time to familiarize yourself with the subject, let alone that you study it academically.
What could I do to convince you? It really wouldn't matter to me if you believed it or not if I didn't feel like I'm being dismissed as a liar by nearly everyone on this thread. It's like these people are just shocked out of their mind that someone who studies biology would disagree with a particular scientific theory, not realizing that there are disputes constantly among people who study science.
|
