evolution: 1 creationism: 0

>I could believe in flat earth before I could believe
>in the origin of life by natural random processes.

Look, you already know that I'm not going to attempt to convince you of evolution as orgin of the species, cause I'm not convinced myself. I have many of the same questions that you do. I do however wish to point out something in your statement that pretty much gives you ZERO credibility in my world.

So, even though you can put a compass in front of your face and head west...and eventually end up back at the same place (in other words, you *know* the world it not flat for a fact). Even though you *know* you can't prove that evolution isn't the origin of the species. Even though one is a *known* and one is an *unknown*, you admit to being able to believe AGAINST the known before believing in the astronomically small chance on the other side.

And there lies sad blindness and blindness is unattractive to me from whatever side.

JB
 
>Fine but then believe in something that's
>scientifically tenable. At least look into
>pantheism or deism or panspermia.

I thankfully was spared the "You MUST believe in something" gene. It's rather liberating. Wish you could try it.

>But please don't tell me that materialism makes
>sense when it comes to explaining the origin of
>life on our fair planet.

I haven't heard a theory that makes complete sense to me yet. But for sure creationism by a caring god is the one that makes the least sense because is simply doesn't pass the most basic of logic tests (and that's where knowing what *not* to believe comes in).

JB
 
Shoeshineboy,

What an incredible series of posts. If nothing else, I think you have demonstrated beyond peradventure that skepticism about evolution and spontaneous creation is not a matter of anti-intellectual religious brainwashing. The fact that the scientific and education establishment's main line of defense is ridicule and name-calling betrays the weakness of their argument.
 
Quote from Turok:

>I could believe in flat earth before I could believe
>in the origin of life by natural random processes.

Look, you already know that I'm not going to attempt to convince you of evolution as orgin of the species, cause I'm not convinced myself. I have many of the same questions that you do. I do however wish to point out something in your statement that pretty much gives you ZERO credibility in my world.

So, even though you can put a compass in front of your face and head west...and eventually end up back at the same place (in other words, you *know* the world it not flat for a fact). Even though you *know* you can't prove that evolution isn't the origin of the species. Even though one is a *known* and one is an *unknown*, you admit to being able to believe AGAINST the known before believing in the astronomically small chance on the other side.

And there lies sad blindness and blindness is unattractive to me from whatever side.

JB
More...

You're missing my point. Is 1 over 100 zero? I one over 10^200 zero? Is one over 10^20,000 zero? I've hit my zero probability point.

Maybe you think there's a chance these events happened.

That's fine for you - I don't.
 
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Shoeshineboy,

What an incredible series of posts. If nothing else, I think you have demonstrated beyond peradventure that skepticism about evolution and spontaneous creation is not a matter of anti-intellectual religious brainwashing. The fact that the scientific and education establishment's main line of defense is ridicule and name-calling betrays the weakness of their argument.
More...

Thx AAA.

When you consider the above and the fact I've had a variety of supernatural experiences, can you blame me for believing in the spiritual side of life and that there is more on planet earth than meets the eye?

Even if you don't agree with me and you don't agree with my conclusions, I just would like for people to see that one does not have to commit intellectual suicide to believe in ID or at least that it is a distinct possibility.
 
>You're missing my point. Is 1 over 100 zero? I one
>over 10^200 zero? Is one over 10^20,000 zero? I've
>hit my zero probability point.

No, I've got your point completely. If you had said "I'll believe in those odds immediately *after* believing the world is flat" then you would have never heard from me. In fact you used the word "before" and that is telling.

Hey Shoe, I didn't expect us to agree so there's no disappointment here. It's cool

JB
 
Quote from Turok:

>You're missing my point. Is 1 over 100 zero? I one
>over 10^200 zero? Is one over 10^20,000 zero? I've
>hit my zero probability point.

No, I've got your point completely. If you had said "I'll believe in those odds immediately *after* believing the world is flat" then you would have never heard from me. In fact you used the word "before" and that is telling.

Hey Shoe, I didn't expect us to agree so there's no disappointment here. It's cool

JB
More...

Hey, you couldn't find two people with more disparate experiences.

Best wishes...
 
Shoe.... you may label it a disaster out of pure ignorance, but
you are far from proving this.

First of all, your math is WRONG.

Check out your quote:
That is over 1 major animal phyla per million years!

Clearly you are being as misleading as possible by
implying that these entities could not have evolved in *PARALLEL*. This is NOT a sequential process.

There is no magical power that forces one animal phyla
to hold off on its evolution until the PREVIOUS one is completed.

That is totally absurd.

Its these types of strawman tactics that completely discredit you.

It is blatantly obvious that you have started with a conclusion,
and are attempting to do everything possible to suport it.
This is the opposite of science.


The fact remains.... evolution has thousands of research papers,
and tons of data, supporting it, and creationism is the biggest
unsupported fairytale I have ever heard of.


peace

axeman




Sorry, but the Cambrian Explosion is a disaster for the evolutionary theory soft tissues or not. Secular estimates for the time window for this event are between 5 and 50 million years!

Let's choose the bigger number to give NeoDarwinism every advantage. Stop and think about what this says:

1. In 50 million years, 70+ new animal came into existence!
2. That is over 1 major animal phyla per million years!
3. One animal phyla would take thousands and thousands of perfectly sequenced mutations that would have to spread to the larger population all within one million years??
4. Keep in mind this is not 70 species coming into existence- this is 70 phyla springing into existence!
 
Quote from axeman:

Its these types of strawman tactics that completely discredit you.
More...

I've noticed that just about everyone you debate with gets accused of using "strawman tactics." I'm just curious, but did you grow up on a farm with a lot of straw? Are you a big fan of the Wizard of Oz? Do you sleep on a straw bed?

Were you a horse in your former life?
 
Nice Ad Hominem.

Big surprise.... a theist defends a theist using a fallacy with
yet another fallacy.

Did it ever occur to you, that the reason I point out strawman
fallacies **IS BECAUSE THE THEISTS KEEP USING THEM*** ???

Are you really this clueless aphex? Do you even know
what a strawman fallacy is?

Are you seriously claiming that they are NOT using strawman fallacies?

Shoeshine CLEARLY used a strawman by using false math
to attack a position.

Sorry... but when someone uses bullshit tactics like this,
im gonna call them on it. We understand you dont like seeing
the theists getting shot down left and right. But in the end,
thats THEIR fault, not mine.

If they wish to not get called on a strawman again, the solution
is really quite obvious. STOP USING THEM :D



peace

axeman



Quote from aphexcoil:

I've noticed that just about everyone you debate with gets accused of using "strawman tactics." I'm just curious, but did you grow up on a farm with a lot of straw? Are you a big fan of the Wizard of Oz? Do you sleep on a straw bed?

Were you a horse in your former life?
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top