Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
August 3, 2011 at 5:13 pm (This post was last modified: August 3, 2011 at 5:40 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(August 3, 2011 at 3:31 pm)Godschild Wrote: Cop-out, none of you can explain it and Dawkins is a rambling nut job. Dawkins never explained the optic nerve nor the development of the part of the brain responsible for sight, nothing about how the image is inverted.
And you or your bible can????? You have any idea what optical nerve really is and how it is configured? You have any idea how optical nerve enters the optical papilla in the back of your eye and spreads out to forms a opaque and shadow forming net of ganglion cells in front of the light sensing rods and cones of your retina? Do you know that the light sensing rod and cone cells of your retina, which you squander so often forcing it to form images of words you imagine to be from some sky man that gave you the retina, is actually obscured by 5 different layers of tissues between it and the incoming light ??????
Do you freaking know how terrible the human retina and optical nerve is designed from engineering perspective? It's like a digital camera whose circuits are located in front of the CCD that captures light, so as to ensure every image it sees is partially blocked, obscured and distorted.
Do you still like to credit this disgraceful kluge of an eye you use to read the bible to some omniscient omnipotence? Perhaps god in his great goodness, just hates you.
Can it be better engineered? Sure it can. Every camera is better engineered. The god damned squid is better engineered. Appearently god can, but not for you. Squid has a much better eye than we. Its optical ganglion net actually enters the retina from behind, so as to not block the light reaching the rods and cones in its eyes. It actually has an proper optical instrument for an eye. A squid is never known to pray. A squid is never known to praise Jesus. A squid squirts black ink at the sight of approaching bible. Yet god love the squid more than you. Poor Godschild.
As to those things you ask us to explain, as matter of fact we can, and Dawkins, far more surely even than the fact that you will wimper back to your bible whenever reality threaten to intrude, also can. But it's not his job, nor to his profit, nor is it ours nor to our profit, to squander time trying to enlighten the type of unenlightenable biblical ignorance such as yours. If you want to find out, if you would like to demonstrate that we underestimatre you and you are in fact enlightenable, then it's up to your to stop squandering time reading the bible and start using it instead to find out exact how far we've gone past it. Ditch your bible first, and then we might help you a little to find out what had been possible without it, and how much of what it promised is utter bullshit.
Oh, while you might, but probably will not, be pondering this, have you looked up the construction of the pin hole eye of squid's nautilus relatives, like I asked you several posts back, in an honest endeavor to find out just how something like your eye could have evolve?
Yet again you totally miss the point Rhythm. I am not a creationist, of any flavour. That isn't my point. You try to claim some high ground somehow through technological advances <--- it is this I'm demonstrating to be bullshit, together with the rest of your trolling.
August 3, 2011 at 6:29 pm (This post was last modified: August 4, 2011 at 8:39 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Where have you demonstrated anything. Dead serious. Demonstrate something to me. That's exactly what I keep asking you to do. Early christians knew how to demonstrate things. The very first christian was a damned miracle worker for fucks sake. Demonstrate something. Don't throw your hands up in the air and say godditit. What exactly is bullshit based upon a worldview where evidence is required before one can make claims to knowledge? Demonstrate anything at all.
Again, I didnt write your myths Frodo, it's not trolling to disagree with them. When asked why I disagree with them, or when challenged to give reason as to the disagreement, if i reduce the argument to the absurd, it's not that I've MADE the argument absurd, it was absurd to begin with. Don't blame me for christian baggage. If you also have a disagreement with creationists, don't hop in here and throw them your support. They're trashing your myth, not me.
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!
(August 3, 2011 at 3:31 pm)Godschild Wrote: Cop-out, none of you can explain it and Dawkins is a rambling nut job. Dawkins never explained the optic nerve nor the development of the part of the brain responsible for sight, nothing about how the image is inverted.
Don't ignore my post. Go back, read it, respond. I don't care about the optic nerve. I don't need to explain it. Your argument requires that everything in the world be designed, so you have to explain EEEEEEEEEVERRRRRRRRYTHIIIIIIIING. We've given you plenty of examples of things that, if they were designed, would be shit designs. Do not tiptoe around this again. If you insist on contributing to my thread, then respond to posts made directly addressing you. People have responded to yours and you have brushed it off without even watching the Dawkins video (he is a fucking biologist, he knows exactly what he is talking about).
Now, one more time. Explain the appendix, explain the design of humans needing 8 hours sleep a day, explain why we can live without three of our internal organs, explain why the human reproductive system is so inefficient, explain why we can't inhabit vast areas of the world. If you cannot do this, then admit that no all-knowing being could have designed these things, or at the very least stop clogging up my thread with your irrelevant challenges.
Quote:Can anyone explain to me the step by step evolution of mans eye, please start from the first step, thanks Godschild.
You see, Void, G-C takes it on "faith" (stupidly, but what would you expect from him) that HE is the peak of creation. The fact that an eagle has five times the number of vision cells per millimeter on its retina is lost on a bozo like G-C.
You see, eagles need their vision to spot prey and survive thus evolution has rewarded the eagles with the best eyesight. Whereas you, G-C, waste your time reading a stupid old fucking book which tells you how superior you are. You may as well be blind. I bet the average eagle would tear you to shreds.
August 4, 2011 at 1:35 am (This post was last modified: August 4, 2011 at 2:08 am by Godscreated.)
(August 3, 2011 at 5:13 pm)Chuck Wrote:
(August 3, 2011 at 3:31 pm)Godschild Wrote: Cop-out, none of you can explain it and Dawkins is a rambling nut job. Dawkins never explained the optic nerve nor the development of the part of the brain responsible for sight, nothing about how the image is inverted.
And you or your bible can????? You have any idea what optical nerve really is and how it is configured? You have any idea how optical nerve enters the optical papilla in the back of your eye and spreads out to forms a opaque and shadow forming net of ganglion cells in front of the light sensing rods and cones of your retina? Do you know that the light sensing rod and cone cells of your retina, which you squander so often forcing it to form images of words you imagine to be from some sky man that gave you the retina, is actually obscured by 5 different layers of tissues between it and the incoming light ??????
Do you freaking know how terrible the human retina and optical nerve is designed from engineering perspective? It's like a digital camera whose circuits are located in front of the CCD that captures light, so as to ensure every image it sees is partially blocked, obscured and distorted.
Do you still like to credit this disgraceful kluge of an eye you use to read the bible to some omniscient omnipotence? Perhaps god in his great goodness, just hates you.
Can it be better engineered? Sure it can. Every camera is better engineered. The god damned squid is better engineered. Appearently god can, but not for you. Squid has a much better eye than we. Its optical ganglion net actually enters the retina from behind, so as to not block the light reaching the rods and cones in its eyes. It actually has an proper optical instrument for an eye. A squid is never known to pray. A squid is never known to praise Jesus. A squid squirts black ink at the sight of approaching bible. Yet god love the squid more than you. Poor Godschild.
As to those things you ask us to explain, as matter of fact we can, and Dawkins, far more surely even than the fact that you will wimper back to your bible whenever reality threaten to intrude, also can. But it's not his job, nor to his profit, nor is it ours nor to our profit, to squander time trying to enlighten the type of unenlightenable biblical ignorance such as yours. If you want to find out, if you would like to demonstrate that we underestimatre you and you are in fact enlightenable, then it's up to your to stop squandering time reading the bible and start using it instead to find out exact how far we've gone past it. Ditch your bible first, and then we might help you a little to find out what had been possible without it, and how much of what it promised is utter bullshit.
Oh, while you might, but probably will not, be pondering this, have you looked up the construction of the pin hole eye of squid's nautilus relatives, like I asked you several posts back, in an honest endeavor to find out just how something like your eye could have evolve?
Engineered, no camera, digital or other wise comes close to human vision, even the best supercomputers can not process the info from the eye to the brain and then to the hand to reach out and touch an object as fast as the brain can,so do not spout your drivel at me. Yes squid, eagles and other animals have superior eyesight, they need to because of their enviroment. You don't see any of them living in the wild that are blind. I never said the Bible explains the eye or other body parts, the Bible is a spiritual book, the context of it has to do with the spiritual life and very little with the physical life. You would not understand this though, you are only interested in demonizing God's word. Yes I'm very concerned about the human eye, glacoma runs in my family and this is a highly inheritable disease as a matter of fact everyone on my father's side of the family has glacoma except myself and two nephews, so yes I'm very interested in the human eye.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
I've demonstrated it Rhythm, but you can't see it wearing those blinkers. "a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles".
Joke is tho' I'm not even talking about religion, but about your bullshit worldview. Please get a clue or your going to make it to my ban list = currently 0 members.
(August 4, 2011 at 1:35 am)Godschild Wrote: Engineered, no camera, digital or other wise comes close to human vision, even the best supercomputers can not process the info from the eye to the brain and then to the hand to reach out and touch an object as fast as the brain can,so do not spout your drivel at me. Yes squid, eagles and other animals have superior eyesight, they need to because of their enviroment. You don't see any of them living in the wild that are blind. I never said the Bible explains the eye or other body parts, the Bible is a spiritual book, the context of it has to do with the spiritual life and very little with the physical life. You would not understand this though, you are only interested in demonizing God's word. Yes I'm very concerned about the human eye, glacoma runs in my family and this is a highly inheritable disease as a matter of fact everyone on my father's side of the family has glacoma except myself and two nephews, so yes I'm very interested in the human eye.
Go and answer my post, stop ignoring it just because you don't have the answers. Your post has raised a couple more points:
1. If the Bible says so little about the physical life, how do you feel qualified to comment on whether or not things are designed? Just because it says he created everything? We deal in evidence here.
2. What kind of design would allow for the human eye to catch glaucoma so readily? You'd better get the idea that if things were designed, the design would be a load of shit.
3. There are plenty of animals living in the wild that have very poor eyesight. Moles and bats spring to mind instantly. You are right that the potency of a creature's eyesight is directly related to its environment; that is evolution at work right there.
Now I've told you, if you're going to clog up this thread with your uneducated ramblings, have the courtesy to address the points people are making.
