Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 10:11 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 9:01 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 1:25 pm)AAA Wrote: That is hardly the case. The more we find out about how the universe and living systems work, the more it seems purposefully designed.
Seriously, AAA? You're seriously back to try and argue in favor of design on this forum for the THIRD FUCKING time now? After you have had your ass handed to you twice now? After every one of your false inferences about evolution have been patiently explained to you by people who understand it better then you do? God, you're like a fucking ROBOT. You REFUSE to learn. Go away! I hate how much of our valuable members' time you fucking waste here.
That's not how it ends. It ends when nobody responds and get busy with school. Last time, esquilax stopped responding to me and the rest of you basically said "you just don't understand" and left it alone. But finals are over, so I'm back!
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 10:14 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 7:46 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: We had a smallish orchard on the farm where I grew up. After a fairly fierce windstorm, my brothers and I were doing clean-up, when one of them pointed out that some of the apples on the group formed a pattern that looked not completely unlike a bird.
While it may appear that the tree was clever enough to drop the apples into a shape somewhat resembling a bird, I don't think any sane person would argue that such was actually the case.
Boru
Apples arranging into a bird and biological systems are not even close. I am offended personally that you could make that comparison.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 10:50 pm
Poor old you.
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: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 11:05 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 8:35 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 7:14 pm)AAA Wrote: Ok, forget about Dawkins then. Do you think that natural selection is a designing force?
Nope.
Changes happen. Those changes that afford a survival advantage get passed to offspring. Those changes that do not, get weeded out of the population.
There is no design.
Only survival advantages. Yeah but it leads to the same qualities that a genuine design would possess.
Posts: 67287
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 11:07 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2016 at 11:09 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
No, it doesn't, and that's not just a -little- wrong. You don't see many cable tied, foot pedal powered, canvass covered rudders hidden under the tail of a 747, now do you?
(wait, do you, is that how you think that works....)
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!
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 11:09 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 11:05 pm)AAA Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 8:35 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Nope.
Changes happen. Those changes that afford a survival advantage get passed to offspring. Those changes that do not, get weeded out of the population.
There is no design.
Only survival advantages. Yeah but it leads to the same qualities that a genuine design would possess.
Don't ever....ever...ever.... argue for design if you do then you have to accept the fact that your god is a shitty creator the end.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 3101
Threads: 10
Joined: September 7, 2015
Reputation:
49
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 11:11 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2016 at 11:27 pm by TheRocketSurgeon.)
Step One: Make an unfounded assertion of "facts" that are simply not in evidence, or better yet, garble your scientific definitions so you can chop down that strawman you've built by using those new "facts" you just invented.
(For instance, "Mutation and natural selection has not been shown to be sufficient to account for the complexity of living systems.")
Oh? Since mutation literally means any change in the sequence of the DNA during copying, what other mechanism of change in the DNA do you think we're overlooking, to drive the evolution which we observe happening over time? Is it magic? Oh, I hope it's magic!
Do you mean point mutations cannot account for the rapid changes we see? Well, that's quite true, and is usually the source of the quote-mining where you say "See? Professor McGenius says it's not enough!" Except you ignore that other mechanisms are proposed immediately afterward (and they turn out to not be magic, much to my chagrin, every time) to explain what is actually driving the rapid changes, such as homeotic developmental "instructions" in particular gene sets, in which small DNA changes result in huge phenotype shifts.
Step Two: Quote-mine small, out-of-context snippets from prominent scientists, then distort what they're saying so you can make it seem like your side is bravely and brilliantly pointing out the "flaws" in the scientific method (which you claim to be practicing) and models.
When the proper context of the quotes is tiresomely tracked down by the skeptics to whom you present this bullshit, and the actual information presented to you, you just deny the new information is valid, or you simply pretend you didn't say it, didn't make the mistake, and move on to the next quote mine, which leads to...
Step Three: Machine-gun lots of large, complicated-to-answer questions at your opponents. If they bother to track down and demonstrate your interpretations of that information are either in ignorance or simply full of crap, just move quickly on to the next "gotcha" question, thinking that THIS one will be the one that brings down that dastardly, godless evil-lushun. If they don't want to take the time to find the information you're asking for, don't want to give the equivalent of a semester-long course on genetics to answer it, and ask why you don't just look it up yourself, then you DECLARE VICTORY!, as if their fatigue at your slanted approach means it's really the right answer, after all.
Step Four: Pat yourself on the back for all the extra effort you went through, being ridiculed for thinking that there's a magical explanation anywhere we don't have 100% of the answers (and, based on your past appearances here, even in some places where we do have the actual, non-magical answers), and trying to bring "Tha Laht of da Lawrd" to a gawdless, heathen science-world with no magic in it.
Step Five: Be sure to reassure yourself, preferably in a mirror for extra effect, that even though you're out of touch with 99.9999% of the biologists in your field, worldwide, it's really your tiny little group of rebels and their belief in magic that are the True Scientists™... even if, as Michael Behe admitted on the stand, you're all using a definition of science that would include Astrology and Fortune Telling within its sweep.
GTFOH with that.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
Posts: 8267
Threads: 40
Joined: March 18, 2014
Reputation:
54
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 20, 2016 at 12:03 am
(May 19, 2016 at 3:12 pm)AAA Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 3:06 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote: Not this tired old shit again. Didn't you already severely derail one thread with your design bullshit?
Yeah, I just get annoyed when people imply that it is irrational to believe in God. It's fine if people don't think there is a God, but I feel the need to defend the position that it is perfectly rational to think it was designed by intelligence, and that belief in God is not antiscientific.
It is irrational. Deal with it.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Posts: 8267
Threads: 40
Joined: March 18, 2014
Reputation:
54
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 20, 2016 at 12:05 am
(May 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: AAA should change his name to Mr. Equivocate.
Nope. Triple F. It's the grade he obviously got in his biology courses.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Posts: 8267
Threads: 40
Joined: March 18, 2014
Reputation:
54
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 20, 2016 at 12:09 am
(May 19, 2016 at 7:09 pm)AAA Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 7:01 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Think, really, really hard about the word 'appear'. Biological systems 'appear' designed in precisely the same way that a stage magician can 'appear' to saw a woman in half.
Boru
That's just an assertion. Maybe they appear designed the way a person genuinely getting chopped in half appears to be chopped in half. Why do we have to assume biological systems are counter-intuitive?
Human bodies getting cut in half don't "appear" to be getting cut in half. They fucking well are getting cut in half.
Learn to English, asshat.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
|
