• All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 200.00 credit to your HoP account.
 

Forums > Social Discussion > Intelligent Design vs Evolution

Login/Join to Participate
Page: 1...2324252627...30
ben-ja-men
ben-ja-men

just lost .... evil init
Location: Adelaide
Member Since: 12th Jun 2003
Total posts: 2474
Posted:ok so first read this http://www.venganza.org/
i mean really!!!! wtf?!?!?!?! i just cant get over how censored censored censored censored censored censored censored censored this is.

*deep cleansing breath*

ok so how is it that any educated person (as one would assume the Kansas School Board would be required to have some level of education?) or even a mildly retarded chimp for that matter would even consider adding something like ID to a science curriculum?

Now if the ID group where to be taking a page or two from Cellular Automata (which evolution essentially is just in a much more complex environment with more complex survival/interaction rules) and add that the resulting now is possibly the result of design by choosing the rules such that it would evolve in such a way to have created the given now, or that the soul's link to the real world might be the apparently random quantum tunnelling effects that take place in the microtubules (yet another CA) in the brain then i wouldnt have such a big problem with their proposal. both of which are horribly speculative and cant be proven but both allow for the concept of "god" to be introduced to highlight that science doesnt have all the answers

i suppose next we will be using the fox network for our history classes? confused
/end vent


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?


FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:I disagree - nothing is as complex as the stupidity of men (who invented "faith")! No bacteria, virus, no Pentium IV CPU. "Faith" and stupidity are simply merry go rounds, there is no exit in faith but through your own bowl... there is no exit from stupidity and not even college or university can make one man sane.

Makes me wonder: was stupidity invented and created by the supreme, or did it evolve?


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink


Drudwyn
Drudwyn

Forget puppy power, Scrappy's just gay
Location: Southampton Uni
Member Since: 27th Aug 2005
Total posts: 632
Posted:Stupidity doesn't exist, it is merely an absence of intelligence and rational thought, with an excess of delusion and rash actions. There is a word for it, but I can't remember it. It's like cold and dark in that way. However, this is going wildly off topic.

Human concepts like faith and doubt and so on, don't mean anything as they are purely concepts. They are part of social evolution, and as such belong elsewhere. Social hierachies are an interesting area of psychology and philosophy, but aren't the issue here,


Spin, bounce, be one with the world, because it is yours to enjoy...


FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:(just to provoke) Reading even halfway through this thread I can't find it offtopic...

If man was created after the image of his creator, the creator must be perfectly stupid. As he is perfect in all other aspects... wisdom, knowledge, virtue...

F*** duality! This religion game is merely about the stupidity and to control those "who were designed to be"...

You classify stupidity in a certain way that is mainstream. I can't follow up on it, this way right now. I say stupidity exists, not just as an "absence" or lack of intelligence. There are very educated and rationalised people, who act extremely stupid. Stupidity and intelligence do not exclude each other.

And (just to raise the question) why is it that every time it comes to the restroom-scene, god is not in it? God doesn't have to fart or sh1t, he neuther has to fcuk to reproduce, nor does he have to eat or drink. He doesn't even have to sleep and is everywhere, all the time... how much do we have in common with this figure (if he exists at all)?

Created by................... Aliens *woahahaha* I seem to have lost track about the true intention of this thread long ago... shrug

redface pardon me...


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink


Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Fire Tom, its not that difficult to figure out. It's a story and it's all made up. We were never created, we evolved, and man created God in his image.

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


spiralx
spiralx

veteran
Location: London, UK
Member Since: 1st May 2002
Total posts: 1376
Posted: Written by: Alien_Concept


 Written by: Patriarch917


Very cool news on the structure of the brain...



Yeah! The part of the brain where spatial dimension is calculated is bigger amongst taxi drivers.


London black cab drivers to be precise. Most likely because the Knowledge is the strictest requirement for drivers anywhere in the world...

 Written by:

London's black cab drivers must pass a daunting exam known as "The Knowledge" before they can sit behind the wheel. The Knowledge takes two years of study, and prospective drivers must memorize some 25,000 streets near Central London, and learn the quickest way between points. They must also know the whereabouts of every hospital, theatre, hotel, train station, etc., etc., etc. Then they sit for months of rigorous exams before being certified. Rest assured that a driver of a black taxi knows his or her stuff!



That "near Central London" is within six miles of Charing Cross, a vast area of London...


"Moo," said the happy cow.


FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:According to a survey at american universities, 58% of the students take the story of Adam and Eve literally.

The same survey showed that 23% believe, that god created humans 10.000 years ago.

At the university of Ohio it was learned that only 62% of those studying natural sciences are convinced that evolution is proven and nowadays more and more professors at universities in the US have to watch their students start counting a skeletons ribs, when asked which gender it would be...

Not very smart if you think that a skeleton has no gender in the first place... umm wink ubblol tongue


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink


Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Fire Tom, It all makes me wonder if we are entering another Dark Age of ignorance and superstition.

I'm thinking they should survey students at those american universities and ask them if they know what metaphor means.

rolleyes


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


spiralx
spiralx

veteran
Location: London, UK
Member Since: 1st May 2002
Total posts: 1376
Posted:If you want to see speciation in action, this page has a living example with no "missing links".

http://www.osc-ib.com/revision/pdf/biologyoptd2.pdf
br>
smile


"Moo," said the happy cow.


Patriarch917
Patriarch917

I make my own people.
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Member Since: 2nd Oct 2005
Total posts: 607
Posted:Actually, that's an example of subspeciation in action. It is taking place through the loss of genetic material , not additions of new characteristics through random mutations. Both examples are simply different "breeds" in the same species.


Domino
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Member Since: 26th May 2004
Total posts: 757
Posted:BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH!!!!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5479410612081345878&pl=true
br>
This Creationist video has the same arguments that have been hashed and rehashed again and again. It's nothing new in there but in the first 5 mintues is a great bit of reasoning as to why bananas are proof of God that made me smile.

There's also a nice bit about how no one can make an absolute statement (ie "There is no God") because to do so requires omnipotence, which no one has - that itself being a n absolute statement.

The upshot of this is that because without being omnipotence you can't "know" that there is no God an "Atheist" cannot exist but therefor is an "Agnostic". What is not meantioned is that without being omnipotence you can't "know" that God does exist, so you too are an Agnostic.

I realise that post adds little to the thread, it's just that the banana argument really did make me crack a smile ubblol


Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.


Patriarch917
Patriarch917

I make my own people.
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Member Since: 2nd Oct 2005
Total posts: 607
Posted:I have not watched the video. If they indeed tried to make the argument as you expressed it, they are clearly wrong. I will explain it in more detail.

In order to prove the theory that "there is no God" you would have to prove the non-existence of something. This is generally considered to be impossible. It is not restricted to God, but can be applied to aliens, purple cows, or anything you haven't seen. In order to know that something doesn't exist, you would have to know everything that does exist.

The term for this is omniscience, not omnipotence. The special thing about applying this analysis to God is that omniscience is a characteristic generally associated only with God. That's the tricky part.

In order for an Atheist to say with certainty that "there is no God" he would have to be omniscient. Thus, in order to know that there are no gods, an Atheist would have to become a god himself.

You are incorrect in thinking that the argument works in reverse. One has to be omniscient in order to know that something doesn't exist, but you do not have to omniscient to know that something does exist.

In order for me to know that purple cows do not exist, I would have to know everything that does exist in order to be able to make sure. On the other hand, to know that there is a purple cow, one need not be omniscient. One need only to have seen a purple cow.

The same works with God. While one would need to be omniscient to know that there is no God, one does not have to be omniscient in order to know that there is a God.

This encourages Atheists to claim not that the believe God doesn't exist, but rather that they simply have no belief on the subject. Technically, this does make them agnostics.

Men will never be able to disprove the existence of God, because to do so would require the men to become gods themselves. Agnosticism is too lazy a position for people capable of rational thought. The idea of God will always be with humanity. Atheism is an untenable position, and agnosticism is unimpressive (rocks also lack opinions).

On second thought perhaps I am being too insulting to the rocks. After all, the Bible speaks highly of the ability of rocks to glorify God.



spiralx
spiralx

veteran
Location: London, UK
Member Since: 1st May 2002
Total posts: 1376
Posted:Not really, because atheism is a matter of faith; as you say, you can't disprove god. Therefore proof, or lack of it, (proof being disproof in this case) is irrelevant.

"Moo," said the happy cow.


Domino
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Member Since: 26th May 2004
Total posts: 757
Posted:I feely admit, I post that video mostly because the banana comment made me laugh. The video doesn't present a particlularly good argument and at least half of it is given over to ways to try and convert an athesist, specificly mentioning that it's not a good idea to dwell too long on the intellectual aspect of it.

 Written by: Patriarch917


The term for this is omniscience, not omnipotence.




Beg pardon.

 Written by: Patriarch917


You are incorrect in thinking that the argument works in reverse.




I disagree when it relates to a total lack of evidence. I might in fact be a purple cow. Without any evidence of this, you would need to be omniscience to know if I was.


Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.


UCOF
UCOF

Carpal \'Tunnel

Member Since: 17th Apr 2002
Total posts: 15414
Posted:I have added this thread to the Stumbleupon firefox browser plugin smile


Domino
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Member Since: 26th May 2004
Total posts: 757
Posted:Hahaha, I love that Stumble button - I haven't slept in weeks

Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.


Patriarch917
Patriarch917

I make my own people.
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Member Since: 2nd Oct 2005
Total posts: 607
Posted: Written by: Domino



 Written by: Patriarch917



You are incorrect in thinking that the argument works in reverse.







I disagree when it relates to a total lack of evidence. I might in fact be a purple cow. Without any evidence of this, you would need to be omniscience to know if I was.





If I were omniscient, I would have the evidence.



In order to get the evidence for somethings existence, I do not have to be omniscient.



To state that there is a total lack of evidence, I would need to be omniscient.



To know if you are a purple cow, I need only know you. I would not have to know everything else.



Oh yeah, and I thought the banana description was hilarious. I always knew the banana was a well designed food, but I never heard all of it's qualities pointed out like that.



Domino
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Member Since: 26th May 2004
Total posts: 757
Posted:Well at least we agree about the banana ubbrollsmile

Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.


jeff(fake)
jeff(fake)

Scientist of Fortune
Location: Edinburgh
Member Since: 15th Apr 2005
Total posts: 1189
Posted:Just saw the "Banana arguement" for the existance of God. biggrin



Those people are pretty stupid.



 Written by: Patriarch917

Men will never be able to disprove the existence of God, because to do so would require the men to become gods themselves. Agnosticism is too lazy a position for people capable of rational thought. The idea of God will always be with humanity. Atheism is an untenable position, and agnosticism is unimpressive (rocks also lack opinions).

By this logic you must also believe in the Flying Spagetti Monster, and the Invisable Pink Unicorn.



And by the way, atheism isn't untenable. Someone could rationaly believe something is true based on the basis of lack of evidence for the opposite. You're confusing atheism with absence of belief rolleyes.

 Written by: Patriarch917



Actually, that's an example of subspeciation in action. It is taking place through the loss of genetic material , not additions of new characteristics through random mutations. Both examples are simply different "breeds" in the same species.



That's exactly what speciesism is. Oy...



And we've already shown new characteristics forming though random mutations.


According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


jeff(fake)
jeff(fake)

Scientist of Fortune
Location: Edinburgh
Member Since: 15th Apr 2005
Total posts: 1189
Posted:To summarise this thread in it's entriity...



 Written by: atheists of silicon valley

# PEACOCK ARGUMENT FROM SELECTIVE MEMORY

(1) [Christian asks "stumper" question.]

(2) [Atheist answers question.]

(3) [A lapse of time]

(4) [Christian repeats question.]

(5) [Atheist repeats answer.]

(6) [A lapse of time]

(7) [Christian repeats question.]

(8) [Atheist repeats answer.]

(9) [A lapse of time]

(10) Atheist, you never answered my question.

(11) Therefore, God exists.





According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


mcp
mcp

Flying Water Muppet
Location: Edin-borrow.
Member Since: 20th May 2003
Total posts: 5276
Posted:i AM a flying spaghetti monster! Haven't you seen my hair? biggrin

"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.


Patriarch917
Patriarch917

I make my own people.
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Member Since: 2nd Oct 2005
Total posts: 607
Posted: Written by: jeff(fake)



 Written by: Patriarch917

Men will never be able to disprove the existence of God, because to do so would require the men to become gods themselves.

By this logic you must also believe in the Flying Spagetti Monster, and the Invisable Pink Unicorn.




Not at all. Read my post carefully. I do not claim that an inability to prove a lack of existence means that you must believe something exists. Instead, I claim that an inability to prove a lack of existence allows you merely to be uncertain. I will elaborate:

I cannot prove that aliens do not exist. In order to do that, I would need to have checked everywhere in the universe.

However, I cannot simply say "I can't prove that there are no aliens, thus they must exist." This would be an example of the logical fallacy known as an "argument from ignorance" where one essentially says "Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen hypothesis is therefore considered proven."

It may be helpful in this instance to consider the adage "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

What I presented in the post you quoted was not an argument in favor of the existence of God. It merely demonstrated that it is irrational to claim to be certain that there is no God. At best, you can merely say that you lack knowledge about whether God exists. This is called agnosticism.

A case for the existence of God cannot be based on the irrationality of Atheism. Instead, the case for God's existence should be based on the evidence in favor of God.

 Written by: jeff(fake)


And by the way, atheism isn't untenable. Someone could rationaly believe something is true based on the basis of lack of evidence for the opposite.




Actually, that would be an example of irrationality. This is the sort of reasoning that you mistakenly thought I was advocating.

Stated succinctly it is a logical fallacy when "a person erroneously regards the lack of evidence for one view as constituting evidence or proof that another view is instead true."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
br>
 Written by: jeff(fake)


You're confusing atheism with absence of belief rolleyes.




If I had wanted to confuse Atheism with an absence of belief, I would merely have quoted you when you said:
 Written by: jeff(fake)

Atheism means the absence of belief in God




Sym
Sym

Geek-enviro-hippy priest
Location: Diss, Norfolk
Member Since: 28th Sep 2004
Total posts: 1858
Posted:ubblol

You're still at it!

I'll drop in again when you get to page 60...

Have fun hug


There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees


Matty_B
Matty_B

veteran
Location: Blu's Pocket
Member Since: 16th Feb 2005
Total posts: 1314
Posted:Invisible Pink Unicorn ?

if something is invisible, can it be pink ?

if it is pink, then surely we should be able to see it, and ,ergo, not invisible ?



Sym
Sym

Geek-enviro-hippy priest
Location: Diss, Norfolk
Member Since: 28th Sep 2004
Total posts: 1858
Posted:But in doing that you're guilty of appling logic to faith...

There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees


Matty_B
Matty_B

veteran
Location: Blu's Pocket
Member Since: 16th Feb 2005
Total posts: 1314
Posted:I think I will leave before I cause anymore trouble . . . wink


jeff(fake)
jeff(fake)

Scientist of Fortune
Location: Edinburgh
Member Since: 15th Apr 2005
Total posts: 1189
Posted: Written by: Patriarch917



 Written by: jeff(fake)



You're confusing atheism with absence of belief rolleyes.





If I had wanted to confuse Atheism with an absence of belief, I would merely have quoted you when you said:

 Written by: jeff(fake)

Atheism means the absence of belief in God





Good grief. You've even quoted it and gotten it wrong. Atheism means an absence in belief in God, not an absence of belief.



What part of this is complicated? confused



I mean, there are tons of religious atheist groups. Many forms of Bhuddism for example.



Look at the word.



"A-" meaning absence or opposite



"theist" meaning belief in God



All together - "a-theist" - absence of belief in God, not an absence of belief altogether. Many atheist have very few beliefs or none altogether, some have lots. All that atheist is is a word to describe any person who believes in one less of the many thousands of gods that mankind in their ignorance dreamt up to explain away things they couldn't answer than you do.


According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


jeff(fake)
jeff(fake)

Scientist of Fortune
Location: Edinburgh
Member Since: 15th Apr 2005
Total posts: 1189
Posted: Written by: Patriarch917

At best, you can merely say that you lack knowledge about whether God exists. This is called agnosticism.


One can lack knowledge of something and not believe in it. I have no evidence for an Invisable Pink Unicorn and I don't believe in an Invisable Pink Unicorn. I don't disbelieve in it, I simple don't believe in it. It is the same condition with standard atheism.

I think I've made that simple enough...

Incidently, I'm not an atheist. I'm told my position is known as ignostic, which apparently means I think the whole question of gods, goblins or magic is worthless.


According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


Pogo69
Pogo69

there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
Location: limbo
Member Since: 6th Apr 2006
Total posts: 3764
Posted: Written by: Matty B


Invisible Pink Unicorn ?

if something is invisible, can it be pink ?

if it is pink, then surely we should be able to see it, and ,ergo, not invisible ?



Which now proves (by some of the strange logic being applied elsewhere in this thread).... that pink is a state of mind, not just something that you need to "see" to prove it's existence.


--pogo (pat) [forever and always]


Sym
Sym

Geek-enviro-hippy priest
Location: Diss, Norfolk
Member Since: 28th Sep 2004
Total posts: 1858
Posted:Jeff, I think the amount of posts you have made in this thread alone means you cannot be ignostic, I have always thought of you as an atheist...

There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees


jeff(fake)
jeff(fake)

Scientist of Fortune
Location: Edinburgh
Member Since: 15th Apr 2005
Total posts: 1189
Posted: Written by: Pogo69



 Written by: Matty B



Invisible Pink Unicorn ?



if something is invisible, can it be pink ?



if it is pink, then surely we should be able to see it, and ,ergo, not invisible ?





Which now proves (by some of the strange logic being applied elsewhere in this thread).... that pink is a state of mind, not just something that you need to "see" to prove it's existence.



Good point.



What am I doing trying to hold a rational conversation with someone who believe the world is 6000 years old and homosexuality a sin. Better to take to p*ss really, more fun too.



Find out where Family Guy ranks creationists...



Lookout! It's the Creationist Patrol



Science vs. Norse mythology. Why Norse mythology can beat science where Creationism failed.

EDITED_BY: jeff(fake) (1146526031)


According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


Page: 1...2324252627...30

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [intelligent design v* evolution] we found the following similar topics.
1. Forums > Is Intelligent Design a Theory or a Critique? [60 replies]
2. Forums > Intelligent Design vs Evolution [874 replies]
3. Forums > need your help/opinion [14 replies]
4. Forums > Burning Man 09' Evolution [17 replies]
5. Forums > 5/19 The Next Evolution Sideshow

     Show more..