to the atheists on the board

[ARogueTrader]

Sung to the tune of the old Kennel Ration Dog Food commercial:

"My theory is better than your theory, my theory is better than yours, my theory is better because I got more data behind it, my theory is better than yours."

Theory without proof is just that.....theory.

It is a belief system for those who embrace it.

It is creed and dogma for those who preach it to others.

It is fundamentalism at work when it is thought to be superior to other theories, then used to comdem other belief systems, and presented with a sense of intellectual pre-eminence.

Quote from stu:

I am here randy, watching the evolution of aphex, whilst witnessing the extinction of purile argument, as presented by the likes of ARogueTrader

 

[dgabriel]

Quote from kungfoofighting:

Actually, I do. Not that it makes me an expert, but biology was my college major. So I am adequately familiar with the concepts being promoted. Darwin's definition of evolution included the concept that species evolve into separate species and attempted to give an account of how the earliest uni-cellular organisms are the ancestors of all modern living things. He theorized that natural selection was the mechanism by which inter-to-intraspecies evolution occurred. Remember the title of his famous work, "The Origin of Species"?

Modern evolutionists have changed the definition of evolution to one that is like the one you posted. They have backed away from including the "origin of species", aspect of their theory in the definition, in favor of a diluted, generic one that only acknowledges "change in the gene pool of a population over time." In doing so, they can now state authoritatively that "Evolution is a fact". Having children is thus "evolution", according to this definition. While it is certainly true that changes do occur in the gene pool of a population over time, that is all it is--a change in the gene pool of the population. This does not give an account of how one species begets a new species. Because evolutionists have not been able to determine a satisfactory mechanism for the origin of species, they are no longer willing to use Darwin's postulates in the definition of evolution.

Evolution as the process by which all species originated, is most definitely not fact. It is but a materialistic theory of life's origin.

I am glad to have an expert on hand for these matters. (Don't forget to answer my little questionnaire, btw)

KFF, a few questions.

1) Please give us a definition of species
2) Please explain speciation to us
3) Kindly elaborate on how biologists explain mechanisms of speciation


Thanks. Great to have a biologist on board!

 

[dgabriel]

Quote from ARogueTrader:

Sung to the tune of the old Kennel Ration Dog Food commercial:


Theory without proof is just that.....theory.

It is a belief system for those who embrace it.

It is creed and dogma for those who preach it to others.

Are you critiquing Creationism?

 

[jem]

Never mind I will wait for further information.

 

[ARogueTrader]

Creationism is a belief system, just as the theory of evolution is a belief system.

We have seen many scientific theories over the course of time who lacked proof, even some that did have proof, turn out to be false with further data gathered, via more refined, and powerful instrumentation and testing available.

It was a scientific fact that the sun revolved around the earth at one time.

For those who embrace the theory of evolution with the same degree of faith that a theist embraces God is laughable when that evolutionary theory is presented with such dogmatism, when the theory of evolution lacks sufficient data points to come to a conclusion beyond doubt.

Even if the theory of evolution were shown to be a fact, God could still be behind and controlling every single aspect of it.

Proof of the theory of evolution would still not be a proof for the non existence of God.

Quote from dgabriel:

Are you critiquing Creationism?

 

[stu]

Quote from ARogueTrader:

Sung to the tune of the old Kennel Ration Dog Food commercial:

"My theory is better than your theory, my theory is better than yours, my theory is better because I got more data behind it, my theory is better than yours."

Theory without proof is just that.....theory.

It is a belief system for those who embrace it.

It is creed and dogma for those who preach it to others.

It is fundamentalism at work when it is thought to be superior to other theories, then used to comdem other belief systems, and presented with a sense of intellectual pre-eminence.

Each of your sentences depicts extremely well the defects of religion itself.

You have a strange and rather lame approach to argument , that lists the conspicuously obvious essential requisites of religion..... and then pretends it applies to the contrary viewpoint.

 

[dgabriel]

Quote from ARogueTrader:


Even if the theory of evolution were shown to be a fact, God could still be behind and controlling every single aspect of it.

Proof of the theory of evolution would still not be a proof for the non existence of God.

Personally, I don't have the slightest concern to disprove God.

Evolution does not seek to disprove God. It is a collection of facts and is utilized in the search for an understanding of a part of the natural world, and is internally consistent whether your God is recognized or not.

Any hypothetical can be supposed. But while we are on the subject, if God is running evolution, can you give us a hint of how he does it?

Why is it no one wants to answer questions here? They only want to make statements

 

[ARogueTrader]

How does God run evolution? It is called cause and effect.

Behind every effect, there is a cause.

The theory of evolution is a theory of cause and effect lacking proof of the ultimate causes of the measured effects.

Theists believe that God is the first cause behind all measureable and all possible effects. What is so difficult to understand of that simple concept?

Quote from dgabriel:

Personally, I don't have the slightest concern to disprove God.

Evolution does not seek to disprove God. It seeks an understanding of a part of the natural world and is internally consistent whether your God is recognized or not.

Any hypothetical can be supposed. But while we are on the subject, if God is running evolution, can you give us a hint of how he does it?

Why is it no one wants to answer questions here? They only want to make statements

 

[ARogueTrader]

Theists take no shame in admitting they are employing the vehicle of faith in their belief systems, why do you suppose the atheists are so unwilling to admit they do the same with their practicing of unproven theories?

The "defects" of religion itself are in the eye of the beholder.

Your never ending use of negative verbage describing the theist simply illustrates a lack of intellectual honesty about your own emotional state of being.

Quote from stu:

Each of your sentences depicts extremely well the defects of religion itself.

You have a strange and rather lame approach to argument , that lists the conspicuously obvious essential requisites of religion..... and then pretends it applies to the contrary viewpoint.

 

[dgabriel]

It is a shopworn fallacy - to regard evolution as a faith instead of a science.

It is constructed on data from the natural world. It proceeds on certain hypotheses and seeks data to confirm or deny those hypotheses.

Genetic change is an observable fact.

The whole effort to conflate evolution with religion and faith is an old political argument.

Once again, how come no one can answer any of my questions?