You know, for a thread titled "Evidence God Exists", so far I haven't seen any.

(March 12, 2010 at 9:36 am)fr0d0 Wrote: So you'd disagree then Min that the human species is dominant?

I think you're misunderstanding the argument here.

Angel's saying that not only is our intelligence unique, it is special and dominant. While we do hold a certain level of dominance on land, our intelligence is a product of our evolution into a changing environment. Our intelligence is no less special than a dolphin's sonar, a bat's echo location, a dog's hearing, or a cheetah's speed. Every single animal is the world has unique traits, otherwise it quite simply wouldn't be here.

The whole point that we're trying to convey is that it's absurd and a bit foolish to say that just because it looks like we're at the top, God must have put us here. It's an argument from personal incredulity and doesn't look at the other factors in the equation. It also makes the assumption that we cannot be "overtaken" by another "intelligently special" species by process of evolution.

We're so special? Put us anywhere without electricity or tools. The vast majority would die within days. It's all a matter of environment. This is observable and demonstrable. Saying "God did it" isn't, and it's just intellectually dishonest.

(March 12, 2010 at 10:26 am)tavarish Wrote: We're so special? Put us anywhere without electricity or tools. The vast majority would die within days. It's all a matter of environment.

This is very true! Take an average person off the street, put him into a time machine and drop him into a tribe of cavemen 15,000 years ago. This person would have useless skills for the time. He could use a computer, drive a car, program a DVR, etc. He may even have advanced skills such as those of an electrician, plumber, architect or auto mechanic. But these would mean nothing in the new environment. This person would probably die very quickly from starvation and exposure because they wouldn't know how to hunt, fish, build a fire, butcher an animal, make clothing from animal skin, manufacture tools, etc...

We are all products of our environment and the accumulated knowledge of the generations that have gone before.

Do you ever listen?

@ Tav

No I think the point Angel makes is that 'specialness' comes from our unique position of dominance and not the other way around. At this point in time our position reiterates the theology.

Of course there are other forms of intelligence and isn't everything that has no exact equal unique? I think his wording was poor, but he went on to clarify what he meant, which floors the many repeated rebuts on that count.

(March 12, 2010 at 1:54 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: @ Tav

No I think the point Angel makes is that 'specialness' comes from our unique position of dominance and not the other way around. At this point in time our position reiterates the theology.

Of course there are other forms of intelligence and isn't everything that has no exact equal unique? I think his wording was poor, but he went on to clarify what he meant, which floors the many repeated rebuts on that count.

Position of dominance in our own, specialized environment. I'm making the point that we are no more dominant and special than any other animal that is at the top of its food chain in its specific environment. We are nothing without specific tools and adaptations that we have developed over thousands of years. To think we were just created with some sort of divine dominion over species is not seeing the forest through the trees, and going against established facts.

Every single animal is unique. Our intelligence is a unique trait, but no more special than a lion's claws or a peregrine falcon's ability to dive. They are developed over time. Natural selection doesn't favor any one species over another. An assessment of "we are so unique that it had to have been God" is an ignorant argument and from personal incredulity.

Understand?

Welsh cake Wrote:A word of advice: making these assertions you are clearly "civil mannered" and all atheists are douchebags is pointless, arrogant and utterly irrelevant to your argument.

AngelThMan Wrote:I never said all atheists are douchebags. That's your invention. But many times I've been answered with profanity and name-calling, and it is my right to choose who I want to or don't want to communicate with.

Welsh cake Wrote:You practically insinuated it rant-style, but again, its irrelevant to the topic at hand...

Guidelines are never directly relevant to any topic, but it's okay to set them.

Welsh cake Wrote:...what I'm actually frowning upon is how you respond to critical thinking by trying to control what responses will be acknowledged and what will be dismissed regardless of relevancy to the thread, which is audacious to the extreme.

Are we speaking the same language here? I'm not trying to control any responses. And I welcome for people to disagree with me as much as they'd like. I even left an opening for people to freely bicker with me and even put me down. They just have to do it without profanity and name-calling. You've done nothing but contradict my views, but I am still communicating with you because so far you have done it respectfully. The minute you become disrespectful, you will be ignored. I don't think this is unfair.

AngelThMan Wrote:You're being naive if you think that someone who has strong convictions about their beliefs is going to succumb so easily.

Welsh cake Wrote:Many people and myself included honestly couldn't care less what beliefs you profess...

This is just a standard line that atheists love to feed all Christians. In this case it doesn't fit at all as I was merely stating that people, including atheists, are not going to give up their beliefs with every little argument that is presented to them.

AngelThMan Wrote:Wrong! Any disrespectful replies will not be considered. I have a choice, and that's what I choose.

Welsh cake Wrote:Inadvertently, if you wilfully ignore those who criticise your presuppositions because you made unjustifiable claims and invalid causal connections then you aren't debating with us anyway, you're preaching.

I have answered everything. If you really go through what I've written, you may understand that.

Welsh cake Wrote:We also have a choice to respectfully ignore you...

I agree.

Welsh cake Wrote:...why didn't your god concept make everything living on Earth have the same level of sentience to start with? Why have animals if humans were only capable of loving him?

People here expect me to 'listen' (by which they mean concede), when I get arguments like this. Animals support humans. They also provide scientific benefits for the earth, something you should know since you claim to be all about scientific facts.

(March 12, 2010 at 2:37 pm)AngelThMan Wrote: People here expect me to 'listen' (by which they mean concede), when I get arguments like this. Animals support humans. They also provide scientific benefits for the earth, something you should know since you claim to be all about scientific facts.

For a large part of human development, humans supported other animals. We were getting eaten left and right. Please read my posts about perceived dominance.

(March 12, 2010 at 10:09 am)Thor Wrote: You know, for a thread titled "Evidence God Exists", so far I haven't seen any.

Case closed

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/817047-jesu...frying-pan

HOLY ASS MONKEY!!!

LOOK AT THAT!