Thread: Debate yourself!

God created evolution and the Bible is metaphorical. Except the part about Jesus.

Just wanted to say that I really like this idea.

When my brain is actually working, I'll probably be back to participate.

...maybe.

Originally Posted by Noogah

Why do so many species look so similar? We have arms and legs, and so do many animals whether primates, or different animals all together. Anytime we try to develop space aliens in movies and stuff, they always share similar tendencies to creatures from below. Wings, eyes, nose, legs, arms, etc.

Some creatures are better at it than others, and others are more advanced. All are similar though, so this in itself seems to suggest that all animals/creatures are related through genetics. Hence, Evolution.

Let's go!

Yeah, right, I suppose that eyeballs just developed themselves? I suppose a bunch of dogs and cats and humans just appeared at random by accident from some mud? How can you explain why the universe is perfectly fine tuned to life? Evolution has so many holes it is not funny. It can't even explain how life started in the first place!

-_-

Good enough!?

Actually... that video Mark75 posted totally explains everything!

Originally Posted by ????

Yes, if you're stupid and ignorant enough to simplify it to that

Hm, personal attacks. The sure sign of a failed argument. I should just ignore everything else you've said, but...

Originally Posted by ????

Besides, you do realise evolution have nothing to do with the theory of abiogenesis, right? That is, the theory of evolution and the theory of the origin of life are two seperate things which you seem to ignore. One of the first signs of ignorance, not even knowing the basics...

Whoops, there are those insults again. Honestly, I've heard better arguments on the playground. If you're just here to call me a stupid-head and throw mud cakes maybe you need a time out. Anyway, if science can't even prove that life started then I'd say it has a LOT of work to do. I mean, any idiot can look around and logically know that life started. Why? Because it's here! But you can't prove that it started with science... Hm... what's the word to describe that kind of belief...

Oh!



FAITH!

Originally Posted by ????

well... through some seperate "components" and a long long time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

Yeah, so what? I suppose the eye just knew that it was going to develop like that? Look, I know about genetics. Genetic information passes between generations, etc. But how did the genetic information get there in the first place? Have you ever seen a pile of metal turn into an airplane by itself? No, airplanes need to be designed because they are complicated and precise. Just like life and the universe.

Originally Posted by ????

Well with such a claim surely you must have somewhere to start.

Aptly, Genesis.

-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

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?

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...?

~

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.

Originally Posted by Noogah

Why do so many species look so similar? We have arms and legs, and so do many animals whether primates, or different animals all together. Anytime we try to develop space aliens in movies and stuff, they always share similar tendencies to creatures from below. Wings, eyes, nose, legs, arms, etc.

Some creatures are better at it than others, and others are more advanced. All are similar though, so this in itself seems to suggest that all animals/creatures are related through genetics. Hence, Evolution.

Because god made them like that.

This thread reminds me: A few years ago I posted somewhere on DV that god must exist because how can something that sooooo many people believe in not be true.

It still boggles my mind that I was that dumb. The flaws in that kind of logic are apparent and gargantuan.

Originally Posted by Noogah

I won't be wasting my time with them.

Noogahs time is precious. He's got a whole other thread on evolution to read and watch videos then 'get back to us' with his answer.

On a topic that actually has two valid opinions, this thread could be quite fun. But this isn't one of those topics. One opinion is supported by 150 years of peer-reviewed evidence, and the other doesn't have a shred of proof to its name that hasn't been debunked, corrected or flat out proved wrong countless times over the last hundred years.

I'd give you a good argument for ID or creationism if there existed one, but I can not, for there is not. UM I applaud your effort to cater to this gesture, but all this thread highlights is that the rational side knows the ins and outs of both arguments while the creation side can't articulate their own position coherently, let alone present a valid or correct argument in favour of evolution, even in jest.

The fundamental constants of the universe lie in many cases within extremely specific bounds which allow matter and hence molecules, primitive life, through evolution to conscious life, to come into being. Many of these constants must be within bounds of one part in billions to allow matter to form at all. This extremely high degree of 'universal bias towards consciousness', i.e. 'fine tuning', suggests a cosmic will of some sort. One could explain this problem away by invoking the multiverse hypothesis and the anthropic principle, but multiverses have no empirical basis and so by the scientific method we must discard them.

Noogah, don't you know that all the water in our solar system is found on Earth?

Also, you can't prove abiogenesis. All the parts in a cell could not have come together by chance. That's like a tornado disassembling and re-assembling a Boeing 747.

Without transitional forms, evolution is false. You need that smooth transition or else evolution holds no ground. Also, even if evolution is truth, it just means that God created it to test our faith.

The universe exists. The universe had to have a beginning because of the law of conservation of matter. God is timeless and exists outside the laws of his own universe. Therefore, God created the universe.

Originally Posted by Black_Eagle

Noogah, don't you know that all the water in our solar system is found on Earth?

That isn't true. Earth is the only planet we know of that has water in LIQUID form. The galaxy/solar system is full of ice, and hence the solar system is chalk full of water.

Originally Posted by Black_Eagle

Also, you can't prove abiogenesis. All the parts in a cell could not have come together by chance. That's like a tornado disassembling and re-assembling a Boeing 747.

A boeing 747 is an airplane, not an animal/human, and is therefore not reproductable, and the analogy isn't even comaprable.

Originally Posted by Black_Eagle

Without transitional forms, evolution is false.

Um...could you elaborate on this please?

Originally Posted by Black_Eagle

You need that smooth transition or else evolution holds no ground.

Why smooth? Why could it not be rough? The transition is like polishing rocks. The rocks start out as rough, and are tumbled around, tossed, and turned. Over time, they eventually wear away into a smooth gem. The transition itself could be a rough one, but will eventually turn out a smooth creature.

Originally Posted by Black_Eagle

The universe had to have a beginning because of the law of conservation of matter.

Yes, everything had a beginning. Big bang? We don't claim to know the beginning of everything. But we can know how things formed.

Originally Posted by Black_Eagle

God is timeless and exists outside the laws of his own universe. Therefore, God created the universe.

[that was my argument! ] But you can't prove that. You can't prove taht there is anything beyond what youc an see, hear, smell, touch, and feel. To say taht "The universe exists, and must therefore have had external influence" is silly! Flawed logic. We know nature, and we have a logical explanation of how nature made everything.

Originally Posted by Noogah

Um...could you elaborate on this please?

Transitional forms show that an animal evolves, so it is important.

Originally Posted by Noogah

Why smooth? Why could it not be rough? The transition is like polishing rocks. The rocks start out as rough, and are tumbled around, tossed, and turned. Over time, they eventually wear away into a smooth gem. The transition itself could be a rough one, but will eventually turn out a smooth creature.

It does need a smooth transition. You won't see a fish transform into an amphibian, or some land mammal into a whale instantly. That's why you have "smooth" transitions where species show transitional features.


Why don't you counter my argument...

Originally Posted by Bonsay

Because god made them like that.

Originally Posted by Noogah

A boeing 747 is an airplane, not an animal/human, and is therefore not reproductable, and the analogy isn't even comaprable.

You're missing the point. The point is that life is a complex system that can't arise naturally without some other influence. Don't make cop-out statements. Tell us how life can arise naturally. Until then, the analogy remains valid.

Originally Posted by Noogah

"The universe exists, and must therefore have had external influence" is silly! Flawed logic. We know nature, and we have a logical explanation of how nature made everything.

Oh, you do, do you? I'd like to hear that explanation.

Originally Posted by Mes Tarrant

This thread reminds me: A few years ago I posted somewhere on DV that god must exist because how can something that sooooo many people believe in not be true.

It still boggles my mind that I was that dumb. The flaws in that kind of logic are apparent and gargantuan.

I can't believe how dumb i used to be either. Looking at my posts way back when i first started i was Seriously delusional and so so so so close minded.