Started By
Message
re: Intelligent Design Vs. Evolution
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:58 pm to beejon
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:58 pm to beejon
quote:
Truth is, there's no scientific proof or evidence that the complex and varied creation we see today is the result of random accidents.
You're absolutely right, there is no evidence of that.
There is however mountains of evidence that natural selection allowed for the diversification of life through the very ordered and non-random selection of fitness.
I personally have provided over a dozen pieces of evidence in this thread alone, none of which you have even attempted to refute.
0
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:59 pm to beejon
There is no evidence you will accept as proof of evolution.
I mean, that's obviously what you meant to say.
I mean, that's obviously what you meant to say.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:00 pm to beejon
quote:
The basis is that the complexity and variety of life we see today is by the sole mechanism of random accidents.
It's time for Cosmos. Be back after the show.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:00 pm to beejon
quote:
The basis is that the complexity and variety of life we see today is by the sole mechanism of random accidents.
You keep using the terms "random" and "accident" but I do not know why.
SELECTION. IS. NOT. RANDOM. It is the very opposite of random. Random processes could NOT POSSIBLY generate the diversity of life we see.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:02 pm to Roger Klarvin
And its time to tune into Cosmos, I suggest you join in beejon. You might just learn something. 
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:05 pm to Roger Klarvin
No spoilers!!!! 
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:05 pm to NATidefan
quote:
No it's not. You are making it a Godless theory, not Darwin or anybody else. You choose to believe God didn't do this. Lets go through the scientific method.
I come up with a theory or hypothesis based on something I believe to be fact based on some reason. Lets say its that i found acorns under a oak tree and i think if i plant it a oak tree will grow. Then I come up with a way to prove this. Experiment, research, etc. My method is to plant it and see if my theory was right. If a oak tree does grow, I repeat this experiment again, until the outcome can be accepted as fact.
Does the fact I didn't include God made this happen make it a Godless theory or untrue? The answer is no, the person readying my results decides that themselves.
You might as well not believe any scientific discovery, theory, or fact that doesnt have God made it this way written into it. which is pretty much all of them. Because they would all be godless theories by your definition.
First, the Darwinistic theory of the complexity and variety of life cannot be tested scientifically though, that's the thing. It's....here it comes again....guesses and suppositions.
Secondly, not addressing the mechanisms of creation other than teaching they were by random accidents is teaching atheism. If someone asked about the beginning of trees, the atheistic Darwinist answer would be, they were produced by a series of random accidental events. Which has no basis in reality.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:06 pm to Roger Klarvin
I love Cosmos.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:11 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
You keep using the terms "random" and "accident" but I do not know why.
Because that's the mechanism. In atheistic Darwinism, there's a life form which evolves into a more complex life form strictly by a random event occurring, no purpose, no meaning, just an accidental random events which produces more and more random and complex life forms.
quote:
SELECTION. IS. NOT. RANDOM. It is the very opposite of random. Random processes could NOT POSSIBLY generate the diversity of life we see.
In atheistic Darwinism, selection does not occur until a life form is produced by a random event.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:14 pm to beejon
quote:
In atheistic Darwinism, selection does not occur until a life form is produced by a random event.
Thankfully, we have finally reached the crux of the issue.
You simply do not understand the sequence of events. No life form has ever been produced randomly, not even the very first ones.
quote:
Because that's the mechanism. In atheistic Darwinism, there's a life form which evolves into a more complex life form strictly by a random event occurring, no purpose, no meaning, just an accidental random events which produces more and more random and complex life forms.
Without selection, life wouldn't arise. Mutation itself doesn't produce anything but changes in the DNA. It doesn't bring about new creatures at all. Random mutation DOES NOT and CANNOT produce new life forms. Period.
This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 8:17 pm
Posted on 4/13/14 at 8:16 pm to beejon
quote:
Secondly, not addressing the mechanisms of creation other than teaching they were by random accidents is teaching atheism. If someone asked about the beginning of trees, the atheistic Darwinist answer would be, they were produced by a series of random accidental events. Which has no basis in reality.
Not if that was God's plan. Your so self absorbed with being a human and living on earth you can't see outside your on little bubble. Do you have any fathom of how big the universe is? How it's almost impossible to believe we are the only intelligent life out there? If there is a God I think he would chastise you for thinking your so much more important than every other thing he created.
As I asked earlier do you believe Neanderthals could become Christians if they still existed today with the bible existing as it does today? Do you believe they would be able to go to heaven? How bout the ones that died? Were they allowed to go to heaven? Or were they just animals?
This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 8:18 pm
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:17 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Thankfully, we have finally reached the crux of the issue.
You simply do not understand the sequence of events. No life form has ever been produced randomly, not even the very first ones.
What were the sequence of events that produced a life form which split into the plant and animal kingdom?
quote:
Without selection, life wouldn't arise.
Why not?
quote:
Mutation itself doesn't produce anything but changes in the DNA. It doesn't bring about new creatures at all. Random mutation DOES NOT and CANNOT produce new life forms. Period.
What does random mutation do if not produce new life forms?
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:19 pm to NATidefan
quote:
As I asked earlier do you believe Neanderthals could become Christians if they still existed today with the bible existing as it does today? Do you believe they would be able to go to heaven? How bout the ones that died? Were they allowed to go to heaven? Or were they just animals?
That has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. The discussion at hand concerns the mechanism which produced tremendously complex and varied life forms.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:38 pm to beejon
It has everything to do with the discussion at Hand, you say it is a Godless theory because it doesn't follow the way you believe God created life, which I assume you believe is the way the bible describes God created life. But if the bible is wrong about the description of humans being as the only creatures allowed into heaven and that we were created in his likeness it could also very well be wrong about the way he created life. Just like it could be wrong about the age of the earth, etc, etc, etc.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:39 pm to beejon
quote:
In atheistic Darwinism, selection does not occur until a life form is produced by a random event.
"atheistic darwinism" or whatever convoluted rhetoric you're talking about, is not the same as evolution. Do you know that, or are you being daft?
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:40 pm to NATidefan
quote:
But if the bible is wrong about the description of humans being as the only creatures allowed into heaven and that we were created in his likeness it could also very well be wrong about the way he created life. Just like it could be wrong about the age of the earth, etc, etc, etc.
The Book of Genesis is a fairy tale. That doesn't mean that a higher power didn't create life, and life evolved.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:46 pm to TeLeFaWx
Yep.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:47 pm to NATidefan
quote:
It has everything to do with the discussion at Hand, you say it is a Godless theory because it doesn't follow the way you believe God created life, which I assume you believe is the way the bible describes God created life. But if the bible is wrong about the description of humans being as the only creatures allowed into heaven and that we were created in his likeness it could also very well be wrong about the way he created life. Just like it could be wrong about the age of the earth, etc, etc, etc.
I say that Darwinism which teaches creation by the mechanism of a series of random events is atheistic by nature.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:49 pm to beejon
quote:
I say that Darwinism which teaches creation by the mechanism of a series of random events is atheistic by nature.
What is that random series of events that you claim evolution teaches about the creation of life? You keep framing this non-existent claim to destroy because you're scared shitless you're wrong.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 9:57 pm to beejon
quote:
Because that's the mechanism. In atheistic Darwinism, there's a life form which evolves into a more complex life form strictly by a random event occurring, no purpose, no meaning, just an accidental random events which produces more and more random and complex life forms.
Then what's the purpose of gravity? The devil pulling you back to the pits of hell if you try to get to heaven on your own? Are you really this stupid? Really? Evolution isn't about purpose any more than gravity is. And "atheist Darwinism" isn't the same thing as evolution.
This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 9:58 pm
Page 43 of 49
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News