Posts: 7155
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 6, 2013 at 9:25 am
That would certainly inspire me to have a transcendental experience.*
*ie, spooging in my pants.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 1353
Threads: 44
Joined: April 21, 2013
Reputation:
18
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 6, 2013 at 11:43 am
(November 6, 2013 at 9:15 am)apophenia Wrote:
I like your way of thinking! Now, I need to find me some tail in Real Life!
Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere. - Carl Sagan
Professional Watcher of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report!
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 6, 2013 at 12:32 pm
Then I saw that face,
Now I'm a believer!
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 6, 2013 at 1:38 pm
(November 6, 2013 at 2:33 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: (November 4, 2013 at 10:48 am)ToriJ Wrote: If you add something just because of 'beauty' or any other want then it's not really Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design implies that every function of the body has a practical purpose. I wanted only to open the topic!
Yes beauty can prove intelligent design
How can you explain
Symmetrical shapes of most creatures
Non-symmetrical internal organs
It is not even symmetrical; e.g. left hand is not a replica of the right one, it is a mirror image of it, this proves more the intelligence behind the design.
(November 4, 2013 at 8:50 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: If you had a tail and everyone else had a tail, would you not regard tails as a thing of beauty. Tails has a function for some species to climb trees
Mirror image is symmetry, you moron.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 3837
Threads: 197
Joined: August 28, 2013
Reputation:
38
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 6, 2013 at 2:10 pm
(November 6, 2013 at 1:38 pm)Chas Wrote: (November 6, 2013 at 2:33 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: I wanted only to open the topic!
Yes beauty can prove intelligent design
How can you explain
Symmetrical shapes of most creatures
Non-symmetrical internal organs
It is not even symmetrical; e.g. left hand is not a replica of the right one, it is a mirror image of it, this proves more the intelligence behind the design.
Tails has a function for some species to climb trees
Mirror image is symmetry, you moron. I believe socrates was the one that said "If cows had a god, would their god not be a cow." apo posted something similiar
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Posts: 1571
Threads: 179
Joined: October 14, 2010
Reputation:
35
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 6, 2013 at 6:58 pm
(This post was last modified: November 6, 2013 at 8:00 pm by orogenicman.)
MS wrote Wrote:How can you explain
Symmetrical shapes of most creatures
Non-symmetrical internal organs
It is not even symmetrical; e.g. left hand is not a replica of the right one, it is a mirror image of it, this proves more the intelligence behind the design.
This assumes, of course, that symmetry and asymmetry are not a part of the natural world, which, of course, is a poor assumption. Crystal symmetry, for instance, is a direct reflection of its atomic structure, a perfectly naturally explainable phenomenon. Symmetry in biological organisms is a balanced distribution of body parts, but that symmetry is not perfect. If is was, when I divide my face into two parts vertically in a photograph and mirror them, I would not get the exact same facial appearance that I would get from the original face. That is because the environment often shapes that symmetry. For instance, I could have a scar on my right side that doesn't exist on my left side, or even better, I could have a deformity that causes my left cheek bone to sit higher up on my face than my right cheek bone. I could have a drooping eyelid on one side and not the other. These are not design features, and neither is the original symmetry, which is a function of natural selection.
Crinoids and other echinoderms have pentagonal symmetry, which is an evolutionary adaptation to the way these creatures feed, and to the way the parts of their crystalline exoskeletons intermesh.
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 6, 2013 at 7:22 pm
(November 6, 2013 at 2:10 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: (November 6, 2013 at 1:38 pm)Chas Wrote: Mirror image is symmetry, you moron. I believe socrates was the one that said "If cows had a god, would their god not be a cow." apo posted something similiar
Quote:If the triangles made a god, they would give him three sides.
Charles de Montesquieu
Posts: 29853
Threads: 116
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation:
159
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 6, 2013 at 7:43 pm
Thanks Min. I suspected the Yiddish attribution was an error, but idiots tend to float to the top of a google search, and I just didn't have time to drill.
Posts: 508
Threads: 17
Joined: February 25, 2013
Reputation:
3
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 11, 2013 at 7:31 am
(November 6, 2013 at 6:58 pm)orogenicman Wrote: MS wrote Wrote:How can you explain
Symmetrical shapes of most creatures
Non-symmetrical internal organs
It is not even symmetrical; e.g. left hand is not a replica of the right one, it is a mirror image of it, this proves more the intelligence behind the design.
This assumes, of course, that symmetry and asymmetry are not a part of the natural world, which, of course, is a poor assumption. Crystal symmetry, for instance, is a direct reflection of its atomic structure, a perfectly naturally explainable phenomenon. Symmetry in biological organisms is a balanced distribution of body parts, but that symmetry is not perfect. If is was, when I divide my face into two parts vertically in a photograph and mirror them, I would not get the exact same facial appearance that I would get from the original face. That is because the environment often shapes that symmetry. For instance, I could have a scar on my right side that doesn't exist on my left side, or even better, I could have a deformity that causes my left cheek bone to sit higher up on my face than my right cheek bone. I could have a drooping eyelid on one side and not the other. These are not design features, and neither is the original symmetry, which is a function of natural selection. Actually this proves intelligent design
while overall near-symmetry is a matter of beauty
differences proves that it is not nature which formed it (like fingerprints for example or inner organ non-symmetrical positions and shapes)
Posts: 19645
Threads: 177
Joined: July 31, 2012
Reputation:
92
RE: Refuting Evolution
November 11, 2013 at 7:40 am
(November 11, 2013 at 7:31 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: (November 6, 2013 at 6:58 pm)orogenicman Wrote: This assumes, of course, that symmetry and asymmetry are not a part of the natural world, which, of course, is a poor assumption. Crystal symmetry, for instance, is a direct reflection of its atomic structure, a perfectly naturally explainable phenomenon. Symmetry in biological organisms is a balanced distribution of body parts, but that symmetry is not perfect. If is was, when I divide my face into two parts vertically in a photograph and mirror them, I would not get the exact same facial appearance that I would get from the original face. That is because the environment often shapes that symmetry. For instance, I could have a scar on my right side that doesn't exist on my left side, or even better, I could have a deformity that causes my left cheek bone to sit higher up on my face than my right cheek bone. I could have a drooping eyelid on one side and not the other. These are not design features, and neither is the original symmetry, which is a function of natural selection. Actually this proves intelligent design
while overall near-symmetry is a matter of beauty
differences proves that it is not nature which formed it (like fingerprints for example or inner organ non-symmetrical positions and shapes)
No, it doesn't prove anything!
It is part of the greater theory of evolution by natural selection.
|