Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourself, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous and talented? Who are you NOT to be?
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
I had a dream that my friend had a
strong-bad pop up book,
it was the book of my dreams.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Written by: actual quote, from someone who could remember
If the question is put to me would I rather have a miserable ape for a grandfather or a man highly endowed by nature and possessed of great means of influence and yet who employs these faculties and that influence for the mere purpose of introducing ridicule into a grave scientific discussion, I unhesitatingly affirm my preference for the ape.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
Written by: FireTom
Sorry Jeff - I forgot to add atheists, which would make the last 10%..
BTW 100% - 30% (x-tians) = 70% : 2 (J/M) = 35%...
dunno where you've been in math class..
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Written by: mcp
And after all, all these religious types are in a minority, is there any chinese state religion? That's the biggest country on earth, folled by india and russia surely? Hinduism kicks ass, and nobody can really argue with roman catholics. They just build really fancy churches.
so this 100% you speak of is about what, like 25% of the human population?
To do: More Firedrums 08 video?
Wildfire/US East coast fire footage
LA/EDC glow/fire footage
Fresno fire
Written by:
The Chinese are all communists, and everyone knows that all communists are athiest heathens
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
Written by: Stone
Communism is just a blip in Chinese history.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Written by:
I'm fairly certain that the Chinese have no history. Otherwise I'd have learned about it in school, no?
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
To do: More Firedrums 08 video?
Wildfire/US East coast fire footage
LA/EDC glow/fire footage
Fresno fire
Written by:
Hinduism differs from Christianity and other Western religions in that it does not have a single founder, a specific theological system, a single system of morality, or a central religious organization. It consists of "thousands of different religious groups that have evolved in India since 1500 BCE." 1
Hinduism has grown to become the world's third largest religion, after Christianity and Islam. It claims about 837 million followers - 13% of the world's population. 2 It is the dominant religion in India, Nepal, and among the Tamils in Sri Lanka. According to the "Yearbook of American & Canadian Churches," there are about 1.1 million Hindus in the U.S. 3 The "American Religious Identification Survey" is believed to be more accurate. 4 They estimated smaller number: 766,000 Hindus in 2001. Still, this is a very significant increase from 227,000 in 1990. Statistics Canada estimates that there are about 157,015 Hindus in Canada. 5
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
Written by: FireTom
Patriarch I would really like to know whether you are serious about the statements you made on page 21 (cars and forks). Because clearly you are taking an advocates position, defending ID with ridiculed arguments. This might not be of much benefit.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Written by: FireTom
Either, cars and forks, underwent sort of an (artificial) evolution, didn't they? Trial and error... that's the basis. If they would have been intelligently designed, there wouldn't have been any reson to change them - they would have been perfect from the start.
"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"
jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
Written by: Mr MajestikWritten by: FireTom
Either, cars and forks, underwent sort of an (artificial) evolution, didn't they? Trial and error... that's the basis. If they would have been intelligently designed, there wouldn't have been any reson to change them - they would have been perfect from the start.
if the universe were intelligently designed, there wouldnt be any reason for life to evolve? it would've been perfect from the start?
thats quite and old argument is it not?
you could say that in order for something to evolve it must first be able to reproduce, in which case cars didnt evolve, they were designed by something more intelligent.
Written by: ]
Since when is a spork the middle of a spoon and fork? Surely it came after the spoon and fork, not in between them? It's not a middle stage.[/quote
That is one among several possible theories, but not the only one that fits the physical evidence. While sporks certainly have the appearance of being in between forks and spoons, the conclusions that we can draw from this evidence can vary wildly.
One might point to the fact that the spork contains incomplete vestiges of tines that are either developing or being lost. The spork could be called a "transitional form" between a spoon and a fork.
Another might see the spork as a combination of the features of both spoons and forks, and conclude that it must have been designed by someone who saw both and combined them in his head.
Another might theorize that their similarity of form indicates that they all arose at about the same time, and that perhaps they share a common ancestor (like a butter knife).Written by: ]
So I don't quite get what this creationist thread is arguing, firstly it was that creationism was the idea that the world started maybe 10,000 years ago, people popped out of the sunny garden of eden, did all the biblical things spread over all of the earth and in britain started to get ready for the dark ages, while other countries started getting then forgetting to be advanced.
But now the argument seems to be that natural selection is an actual process, that does in fact occur and the earth is as old as everybody says it is. But there was at the start a helping hand from god to get life started, and at occassional future points (if I were to use my intelligence for evil,) I would say at the points of sudden (over thousands rather than millions of years) change.[/quote
Creationism (and ID, as we discussed earlier) does indeed accept that natural selection is an actual process. Creationism disputes that this process is the best, or the correct, explanation for the development.
While ID certainly can accept things such as the world being billions of years old, gradual evolution from a single ancestor, and other things of this nature, Creationism does not. Creationism accepts that evolution is happening, but posits that it has happened rapidly from a large variety of common ancestors that were made at approximately the same time. Creationism accepts the type of evolution that we observe happening in the present, but does not accept certain theories about macroevolution that happened in the past (plants and animals evolving from a common ancestor, for example).Written by: ] This is based on the idea that human scientists haven't been able to create life properly in the supposed conditions availible to creat life back when life was created. (life being back then self replicating molecules of some kind.) This seems to me sort of weakened by the idea that the 'reason' we exist in this universe is because this universe can support and develop our kind of life. We wouldn't be here otherwise. Surely the same argument can be applied to our planet.
ah it's the Strong anthropic principle. Since we're on earth, earth must at some point in it's past been able to produce life.[/quote
It is not based on those experiments, although those experiments provide data that support the theory that abiogenesis could not have happened.
One cannot say that abiogenesis “must” have happened merely because we exist. One cannot say that a Rubik’s cube “must” have been solved by chance merely because a solved on is found. One also has to consider the alternative theory.Written by: ] Men have nipples? Why is that? That's not good design. Plus our eyes have a layer of black tissue over the light receptors, not transparent black, but opaque black. That also seems like something I wouldn't have done if I wanted people to see. We have a vestigial tail and nails and stuff, what are they for? You don't normally see planes with vestigial sunroofs attached to them do you? If somebody designed us, they took a template, made all the changes, but forgot to rub out the old bits.[/quote
Just because something is designed differently from the way you would have done it is not evidence that it was not designed, it is merely evidence that you did not design it. Vestigial tines on a spork do not prove that it was not designed, it just happened to be designed that particular way.
If “poor design” is considered evidence against a designer, then it may follow that “excellent design” should be considered evidence in favor of a designer.Written by:
Meanwhile, why is god such a megalomaniac to keep changing stuff through the process of evolution but not actually make his presence known?
Creationism posits that God is not changing stuff through the process of evolution, but that evolution is merely occurring according the natural laws He created. He has in fact made his presence known, both through creation generally, and through specific revelation (such as the Bible.)
If you are asking to see God in person, this will also occur in the future. Were it to occur now, it would kill you, so it is merciful for God to not personally manifest himself at this time.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
Written by: FireTom
Patriarch...
You are talking about the design of a "supreme being" - a perfect being! One would assume that the design of the ultimatively supreme and perfect being to be less flawed than it actually is... but maybe then I am living in a dream world...
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
Written by: mcp
I mean, if the garden of eden was sooo disease free, why did god create natural selection, because essential then, it's natural selection that's made diseases and caused us to die younger and easier. (or otherwise god nudging natural selection that way.) Surely natural selection is our punishment for original sin?
Written by: mcp
and actually, I think you'll find that Eve chose to disobey god. Adam just went along with Eve. (I think we know who wore the pants in that relationship.)
Written by: mcp
Why we're on the point of literal truth of the bible: Where are the people being turned into pillars of salt?
Written by: mcp
And the interesting attitude that the husband of the that women that got turned into salt (name escapes me) displayed when a bunch of men came round to his house threatening him? So is gang rape of your daughter an acceptable behaviour in an 'emergency' situation? That's an interesting part of the bible that never got turned into law.
Written by: mcpCreationism affirms that God created many different kinds of animals. Creationism also accepts wide variation in the traits of these animals. Thus, poodles, great danes, and wolves likely all had two common ancestors on Noah’s Ark. However, these ancestors were dogs, not reptiles.
so does creationism allow for there to be a process which made lots of animals different? Or did god create them all individually?
Written by: mcp
Yes you can. This is called reason and occams razor. simply: You can say that abiogenesis must have happened because we exist.
And the other argument: You can't say that god created us just because we exist. (because there are other, simpler explainations. and simpler explainations with more evidence are better in the scientific method.)
Written by: mcp
And anyway, don't they make rubics cubes solved, and then you have to mess them up?
Written by: mcp
Soooooo finally: You seem to be happy with god creating the laws that allow evolution and then he sits back and watches them go make new stuff.
Why is it that you're so unhappy with the idea that he did this 100 million (or whatever) years ago, as apposed to 10000 years ago? Just because you want the bible to be the literal truth?
Using the keywords [intelligent design v * evolution] we found the following existing topics.