| OooSnap said: Some have brought up the Lenski experiment. It is emperical, empirical evidence for evolution, right? Not at all. |
Not a single person brought up this "Lenski experiment". Perhaps you should actually read what people say and think about it before posting more stuff.
HintHRO said:
What I understand from your comment is that you assume that genetic mutations are necessary to develop human beings and yes, they are. But it is actually God who decided what the laws of nature would be. When he 'decided' atoms and molecules have to behave in this way, he already knew beforehand that mutations can cause all kinds of diseases or resistant bacteria and other million problems like a carcinogenic environment without a magnetic field around the earth. He decided what was necessary in the universe to create humans. That means he had to compromise and he is not perfect at all, although the bible and whatmore are stating God = perfection. If you're perfect, you're able to edit the laws you're creating (although you can't create something without laws already being there, huge flaw in combining God with science) to something that doesn't cause problems. Making games/software still goes together with dealing problems and glitches, because we're not perfect animals at all. We are dealing with these kind of problems because we don't control everything, but God does right (then he made it himself really REALLY hard on purpose)? The computer itself is dependent of laws that already exists. You can't create a software without laws. I also understand from your comment that he made the universe like a software, made the rules and then let the progress go on its own. The chances that humans will develop yet again on another world are practically zero. When he 'made' the universe and 'decided' what the laws of physics would be, he could impossible be planning to make humans. You know how long it has taken for humans to develop? Why did he take such a long time? Why create dinosaures first and purposely destroy what he made in the first case (1 of many contradictions in history). There are simply too many flaws in Creationism. So many questions that it's useless to continue with it. Especially in this modern society. |
drkohler said:
That's not really a serious question, is it? Only by reading the thread ttile it is clear it's our resident creatonist that opens another "Darwin is evil" quote mining fest... |
Well, instead of him taking potshots at individual arguments that displease him,
I'd like to see him present an alternative we can attempt to falsify. That is the process of science after all.
His likely failure to do so will reveal his hypocrisy better than anything we could say.
The only 'documentation' that we have come from fossils. You can't really actively observe evolution, because it is unfathomably slow. It typically takes millions of years. Soleron did a wonderful job of explaining it. We can, however, see some changes in populations in species that have very fast generational periods. One example is fruit flies, and this is why so many genetic tests are done with fruit flies.
The observational evidence you seek comes from the fossil record.
Been away for a bit, but sneaking back in.
Gaming on: PS4, PC, 3DS. Got a Switch! Mainly to play Smash
| theprof00 said: Fascinating. And what scientific evidence do we have about God? |
The scientific method is about disproving things so we have a narrower view of what the reality is.
Currently I believe science cannot disprove God.
Been away for a bit, but sneaking back in.
Gaming on: PS4, PC, 3DS. Got a Switch! Mainly to play Smash
mysticwolf said:
The scientific method is about disproving things so we have a narrower view of what the reality is. Currently I believe science cannot disprove God. |
| HintHRO said: What I understand from your comment is that you assume that genetic mutations are necessary to develop human beings and yes, they are. But it is actually God who decided what the laws of nature would be. When he 'decided' atoms and molecules have to behave in this way, he already knew beforehand that mutations can cause all kinds of diseases or resistant bacteria and other million problems like a carcinogenic environment without a magnetic field around the earth. He decided what was necessary in the universe to create humans. That means he had to compromise and he is not perfect at all, although the bible and whatmore are stating God = perfection. If you're perfect, you're able to edit the laws you're creating (although you can't create something without laws already being there, huge flaw in combining God with science) to something that doesn't cause problems. Making games/software still goes together with dealing problems and glitches, because we're not perfect animals at all. We are dealing with these kind of problems because we don't control everything, but God does right (then he made it himself really REALLY hard on purpose)? The computer itself is dependent of laws that already exists. You can't create a software without laws. I also understand from your comment that he made the universe like a software, made the rules and then let the progress go on its own. The chances that humans will develop yet again on another world are practically zero. When he 'made' the universe and 'decided' what the laws of physics would be, he could impossible be planning to make humans. You know how long it has taken for humans to develop? Why did he take such a long time? Why create dinosaures first and purposely destroy what he made in the first case (1 of many contradictions in history). There are simply too many flaws in Creationism. So many questions that it's useless to continue with it. Especially in this modern society. |
Pretty sure I left the definition of God/Creator out of my post. (I'm not Christian)
All I said was the Creator had to have a set of run rules for which everything would follow. You're adding flaws to those on your own. Why is it flawed for a species to have evolved and then been destroyed by chance of an asteroid or that it took billions of Earth years for Humans to evolve?
I specifically state Earth years as each planet's rotation of its sun would be different. How long did it really take from the Creator's point of view? Its all relative. Why is it assumed the end-goal of the creator was the human species? What about the other sentient beings in the universe? (please don't try to argue they don't exist as that just mathematically impossible) What about the species we eventually evolve into? Given we don't destroy ourselves completely first.
You have many issues in your post. One is that God has to be this entity that only creates perfection. Looking at our own existense shows that as completely false. Second is assuming we're somehow the center of all of creation/universe. That's simply nonsense when you take a few seconds to truly admire the great expanse of our universe. Then consider that it may only be one of many universes.
All I'm saying is that the fight between the two is pointless. There is no reason they can't be in the same sphere and all life is a by product of the original creation that was really the program itself and not the individual parts that the program evolved to become.
evolution was not compreved.
It is only a large accepted theory, like gravity.
mysticwolf said:
The scientific method is about disproving things so we have a narrower view of what the reality is. Currently I believe science cannot disprove God. |
My point was more the stringent requirements for evolution compared to the absolute acceptance of un-testable alternatives.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
