Thread: Debate yourself!

-nvm-

Evolution states that an organism adapts to its surroundings. While the truth is that god created everything for us, because he loves us. Everything was designed to accommodate us.

I think this thread is an awesome idea. It's worth a try. I thought a bunch of times about doing it in Extended Discussion in regard to the Iraq war, but I thought it might just end up being a sarcasm contest. Let's try to make this work.

Here I go...

The existence of human life is so phenomenal that it had to be planned by a mind that values the creation of other minds. Experience exists, and some experiences involve emotions that are so deep that something had to plan them out. Of all of the possibilities for how the universe could have happened without an intelligent design, the existence of human consciousness and the meaningfulness it experiences barely make up even a blip on the radar. Yet, here the picture is in reality. Meaning exists in the human mind, and its reality without meaning existing in an eternal mind would be so improbable it is virtually impossible. Meaning has to be the result of something eternal that believes in meaning. Positive emotion is too much of a beautiful thing for those who experience it for it to be what merely happened to evolve. The ingredients of it exist for some reason even though a Godless universe would not at all depend on them. This universe was created by an intelligent mind, and that intelligent mind is whom I call God.

Evolution is a very brilliantly thought out theory, but it is not actual reality. Even though genetic mutations happen and some are advantageous, they could not stay in the gene pool long enough to reach the higher levels in which entire organs come into existence. Although scientists fill in what they believe are the key parts of the story of evolution, they do not cover every detail. Also, the evolution of a new species has never been observed. Too much speculation is involved. It is still a hypothesis.

GUYS...

No trolling! Universal Mind is doing it right, you all are doing it wrong. No more of the silly videos, and sarcastic arguments.

Really people, this is for fun! If you can't do this without getting bitter, and sarcastic, then don't post. The point is, we're trying to percieve the universe from each others POV's

Ultimately it should benefit you, plus, it'll be kinda fun swapping places for a while.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Meaning has to be the result of something eternal that believes in meaning.

That's an assumption with no base. How can you prove to me that meaning is nothing but an illusion? A chemical imbalance? The same substance that causes a psychotic villain to feel the need to murder? Meaning is just a product of the brain, as are emotions, and scientists/doctors have shown that before.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The ingredients of it exist for some reason even though a Godless universe would not at all depend on them.

More assumptions. How can you say that a universe produced by Evolution could not produce emotion? That's the whole point of the theory. Chance is unpredictable. You never know what it will bring about. It very well could bring around emotion. Everything we know about the human brain/body exists physically, and was therefore manifested physically. Thus, it could, with great probability evolve.

In fact, it benefits a species to have emotions. The need for water causes anxiety, which causes boots in energy, and ultimately aids in survival. The want for a mate, and love is what causes two people to marry.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Also, the evolution of a new species has never been observed.

Who says it should? Evolution could very well slow down, and even stop. We know so little of it, who's to say that Evolution will always be at the same rate?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It is still a hypothesis.

A theory, UM. And a darn good one I might add.

Please people, don't use this thread as a means to mock the opposite world view by giving a flimsy debate, so youc an watch as another person smushes it. That defeats the point of this thread.

Originally Posted by Noogah

No trolling! Universal Mind is doing it right, you all are doing it wrong. No more of the silly videos, and sarcastic arguments.

I thought I was doing it right. It's not really fair to say "argue for intelligent design" then tell me I'm being stupid when I use arguments for intelligent design.


Like, duh, man. :x

It is abundantly proven that there is energy within all mass. All matter contains energy.

When considering the big bang and the research done at the LHC, even they must consider the time in which there was no matter to which energy can manifest. There was a time in which there was energy without tangibility.

Without a form of tangibility and mass, this energy is infinite.

Although we obviously do not understand this energy at this time, it is clearly within everything that we know of now.

If we define God as an omnipresent being, then it is energy.

If we define God as omniscient, then it is energy.

We cannot properly attach morality to this energy as we do not know of its consciousness.

However, we can speculate on its morality; the flourishing of the energy.

In this case, the ideal is to be respectful to it. As entropy shows that energy deteriorates over time regardless of our interaction (as of yet) then we are powerless to how we maintain it. In that respect, we must consider that it is ideal that we simply survive as best as we can and equally as we can with others in respect to our lucky time with this God.

At that, God is abundantly clear and true.

What do you think...?

~

Evolution is a theory on how creatures evolve once they are here, and it can not adequately explain how life was first created. Creationism attempts to explain, how life was originally created. Creationism is the spark that started life here on the planet, which then later on evolved and changed. Evolution isn't wrong, it simply doesn't attempt to explain the start of life, as creationism does.

It would be more accurate to say that abiogenesis is wrong. Abiogenesis, is the study of how life was created on earth, but even that can not explain how life was created, and only guesses at possibilities.

The idea that life can spontaneously come into existence, doesn't seem to fit in with modern science. Especially life appearing from entirely random and chaotic events. It seems far more likely, that someone or something created the first life on this planet. This is the theory of intelligent design.

If evolution is going to be taught in schools, then creationism and intelligent design should be taught along side abiogenesis, as possibly theories on how life was first created.

Originally Posted by Mark75

I thought I was doing it right. It's not really fair to say "argue for intelligent design" then tell me I'm being stupid when I use arguments for intelligent design.

If you think that you're covering up your sarcasm, guess what. It aint working. Please, just follow the rules. I have specifically asked that you don't exploit this thread in attempts to make the opposite theory look stupid.

That ruins the point. Can you please be mature enough to accept that?

Originally Posted by Noogah

If you think that you're covering up your sarcasm, guess what. It aint working. Please, just follow the rules. I have specifically asked that you don't exploit this thread in attempts to make the opposite theory look stupid.

That ruins the point. Can you please be mature enough to accept that?

Look, all I'm saying is that the universe is fine tuned for life and that (obviously) there is life. What's stupid about that?

I'm not saying any more, Mark.

You said it was fine tuned to life, but you said it in a sarcastic way, and posted a sarcastic video.

Stop trolling.

Don't bother posting more troll posts. I won't be wasting my time with them.