Evolution

[chimp3]

The universe is designed, from the smallest component to the movement of the whole thing, to have a very wide range of optional behavior, and to have prefered behavior due to an attraction, which we observe as the path of least resistance.

Self-organising processes find the path of least resistance by settling into the nearest stable state.

No intelligent direction or design required.

Should we really refer to an oxygen molecule as a "self" because it combines with hydrogen? I think we should reserve "self" for processes that require a theory of mind.

[Banned]

Yes, there are more holes in my knowledge of science than solid material, I'm not so certain college can fix that.

---

Yes it occurs all the time. But it doesn't prove evolution, because evolution assumes an extreme extension of those processes.

Evolution makes no extreme claims. Rather the claim is gradual changes over time. It's creationism that makes the rather extreme claim that the entire universe was spoken into existence in a mere 6 days.

The quick creation depends on whether the cause is great enough doesn't it?

Are you suggesting that mass production isn't economical?

[Amarok]

Rightful reasonable conclusion? Like horses stretching their necks to become giraffes, etc?

Wrong 

The rightful reasonable conclusion would have to be based on observation and testing no?

It  is based on observation and testing and thus reasonable and rightful 

Neither evidence exists for that conclusion, so why buy it?

Yes it has .And i buy it because it has happened.

Would you say that evolution has been more obvious in the past than in modern times?

Evolution is obvious at any point because it's a continual process .

[Ravenshire]

There is nothing extreme about it . And extension are a natural conclusion . And yes they are a good evidence of evolution . You just won't take it to it's rightful reasonable conclusion .

Rightful reasonable conclusion? Like horses stretching their necks to become giraffes, etc?
The rightful reasonable conclusion would have to be based on observation and testing no?
Neither evidence exists for that conclusion, so why buy it?

Lamarkian evolution?!? Really? You're gonna trot out that debunked crap?!? Oh, right. The SDA cult attempts to use it to debunk all of evolution.

Finding evidence for Darwinian evolution is...
Trivially!
Fucking!
Easy!

You do have Google, don't you?!?

[Banned]

So it is, because it probably happened?

That doesn't settle the question of cause does it?

Not understanding a cause is reason to seek it out, not reason to deny it.

You mean dump the answer and look for one?

[Amarok]

The quick creation depends on whether the cause is great enough doesn't it?

Nope 

Are you suggesting that mass production isn't economical?

Economical yes 

Likely no

[Banned]

Should we really refer to an oxygen molecule as a "self" because it combines with hydrogen? I think we should reserve "self" for processes that require a theory of mind.

Should we assume that the designed object has intelligence?

[Amarok]

You mean dump the answer and look for one?

Nope

[Banned]

Evolution is obvious at any point because it's a continual process .

Then why is it only a modern idea?

[Ravenshire]

Evolution makes no extreme claims. Rather the claim is gradual changes over time. It's creationism that makes the rather extreme claim that the entire universe was spoken into existence in a mere 6 days.

The quick creation depends on whether the cause is great enough doesn't it?

Are you suggesting that mass production isn't economical?

Conflating mass production and religious creation?!? I'm calling POE. There's no way this guy is this dumb, and his claim to be an SDA is a obvious fraud. I'm betting he was banking on the SDA cult being small enough that he could skate with minimum knowledge. He obviously didn't expect to run into an atheist raised in an SDA household.