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!
Current time: April 27, 2024, 6:17 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Theory number 3.
#89
RE: Theory number 3.
(October 28, 2012 at 1:47 pm)Rhythm Wrote: This is pretty weak stuff Mystic. You seemed to be interested in an explanation but you refuse to specify what you want explained?

I have no idea how this paradox can be solved, specially because it seems to me to be unsolvable.

When I show contradictions in Quran to Muslims, I don't assume there is an explanation that is possible to solve it.

Basically evolution is founded that any complex design arises from many mutations that were favored by natural selection. It doesn't always have to be advantageous, sometimes, it simply has to do with mating preferences.

No evolutionist in biology ever argues that two arms could have just came out in one step of random mutations. There is a long process involved.

Sure significant changes happen with mutations often in one step, but not something so complex as in having no consciousness to consciousness.

Based on that there has to be a long process of evolution to bridge that gap. But at the same time, there has to be but one step between consciousness and unconsciousness. We acknowledge that in the baby analogy. The mind is developing but at a certain point it has to become conscious after not.

But random mutations would not lead to such a complex design in one step. Just like arms don't develop in one step.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 3:28 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 25, 2012 at 3:38 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 25, 2012 at 3:50 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Annik - October 25, 2012 at 9:07 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 25, 2012 at 10:38 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 12:26 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 10:42 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 25, 2012 at 10:57 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 11:12 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 25, 2012 at 12:29 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:34 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 12:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:48 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 1:40 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 2:00 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 2:13 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 3:30 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 7:20 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 7:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Faith No More - October 25, 2012 at 11:18 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 11:25 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Faith No More - October 25, 2012 at 11:39 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 11:43 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by pocaracas - October 25, 2012 at 11:41 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Tea Earl Grey Hot - October 25, 2012 at 11:53 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Simon Moon - October 25, 2012 at 12:16 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Faith No More - October 25, 2012 at 11:56 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:02 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Minimalist - October 25, 2012 at 12:00 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:21 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 12:23 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:29 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 25, 2012 at 12:36 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:38 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 25, 2012 at 1:21 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 25, 2012 at 4:32 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 25, 2012 at 8:10 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 11:12 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 26, 2012 at 12:03 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 26, 2012 at 6:28 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 26, 2012 at 10:03 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 26, 2012 at 11:17 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 26, 2012 at 11:31 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 26, 2012 at 11:37 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 26, 2012 at 11:41 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 27, 2012 at 1:05 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 27, 2012 at 4:49 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Whateverist - October 27, 2012 at 9:31 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 27, 2012 at 10:50 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 29, 2012 at 3:08 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 27, 2012 at 1:11 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 27, 2012 at 1:18 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 27, 2012 at 1:21 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 27, 2012 at 1:30 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 8:46 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 10:57 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 28, 2012 at 11:12 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:17 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 28, 2012 at 12:31 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:34 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by genkaus - October 29, 2012 at 12:15 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:06 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:28 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:31 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:33 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:35 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:41 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:45 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 28, 2012 at 12:46 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 12:47 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:48 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:52 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 28, 2012 at 12:50 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 12:50 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 28, 2012 at 12:52 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 12:59 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:08 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 3:02 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:57 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:03 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by pocaracas - October 28, 2012 at 12:59 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:05 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:09 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:16 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:22 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:25 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:28 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:47 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 2:01 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 2:09 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 3:38 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 3:45 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 3:58 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 4:15 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 4:16 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:10 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:20 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:19 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 4:32 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 4:40 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:31 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 4:33 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 4:41 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 5:00 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 6:12 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 6:17 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 6:23 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:41 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:43 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 4:49 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:52 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:45 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:46 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:46 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:48 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:57 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 6:25 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 6:27 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 7:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 7:53 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 8:37 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 29, 2012 at 12:43 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by genkaus - October 29, 2012 at 2:11 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 29, 2012 at 1:10 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 29, 2012 at 2:58 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 29, 2012 at 8:59 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by genkaus - October 29, 2012 at 9:04 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 29, 2012 at 9:40 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 29, 2012 at 9:43 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 29, 2012 at 3:30 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 29, 2012 at 3:42 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  How many of you atheists believe in the Big Bang Theory? Authari 95 5267 January 8, 2024 at 3:21 pm
Last Post: h4ym4n
  First order logic, set theory and God dr0n3 293 27087 December 11, 2018 at 11:35 am
Last Post: T0 Th3 M4X
  A loose “theory” of the dynamics of religious belief Bunburryist 6 1667 August 14, 2016 at 2:14 pm
Last Post: Bunburryist
  Top misconceptions of Theory of Evolution you had to deal with ErGingerbreadMandude 76 12690 March 7, 2016 at 6:08 pm
Last Post: Alex K
  A crazy theory Ruprick 11 2695 February 18, 2016 at 10:51 pm
Last Post: ignoramus
  Hindu Perspective: Counter to God of Gaps Theory Krishna Jaganath 26 5798 November 19, 2015 at 6:49 pm
Last Post: Simon Moon
Thumbs Up Number of male vs female atheists? MentalGiant 36 6097 October 10, 2015 at 9:40 am
Last Post: houseofcantor
  So here's my theory RobBlaze 28 8955 August 12, 2015 at 4:10 am
Last Post: robvalue
Video Dr Zakir Naik Vs the Theory of Evolution Mental Outlaw 4 2493 July 23, 2015 at 10:27 pm
Last Post: Mental Outlaw
  my new theory about christians Jextin 49 8035 October 4, 2014 at 7:21 pm
Last Post: Lek



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)