Just Accidental?

Deeje · Oct 30, 2017

ArtieE said:
Do you ever discuss things like pedophilia?

Yes we do. We have many articles in our publications that discuss all manner of sexual deviation.
Are we spared from having those predators in our ranks? No more than any other organization where there are children. Pedophiles do not have their sexual orientation tattooed on their foreheads. And we are by nature a very trusting brotherhood. We don't have the ability, like Jesus did, to read hearts and minds.

We have a very strict child abuse policy now like many other organizations have had to implement for the same reasons. We value our children and we will take appropriate steps to protect them. That doesn't mean that we interpret any approach to a child as something evil. Not everyone who loves children, does so inappropriately. It is a sick mind who imagines this.

ArtieE said:
or mental health?

Absolutely, because mental health issues are at epidemic proportions in today's world. We are not exempt from those things either. Like all medical problems, we recommend seeking the appropriate medical treatment. Many people who suffer with mental illness are drawn to God's promise of a better life in a better world, after suffering for many decades in some cases....so perhaps we might have more than our share of people with mental health issues. It is nice to give them support and hope, but it doesn't take the place of good medical care. All are free to seek out whatever treatment is appropriate for them, be that orthodox or a more natural approach. We do not recommend one or the other...it is up to the individual. Their illness is not an excuse to abandon them.

ArtieE said:
I am just asking to find out if such discussions are encouraged or discouraged.

No, you are just looking for another opportunity to hit below the belt. Its a diversionary tactic you have used before....but so have others. Try providing some evidence for macro-evolution that does not rely on "faith" or "belief"......something that is not a "suggestion" or "conjecture" that relies on "implication"......its been a long wait. Surely for those with a scientific background, and who have access to all this "overwhelming evidence" ....someone should be able to provide substantiated evidence for a process that explains all the lifeforms we see today....without relying on things that aren't scientific....like "might have" or "could have"?

Guy Threepwood · Oct 30, 2017

It Aint Necessarily So said:
ID has no advantages. Goddidit explains no more than It-did-it-on-its own. The question remains, how? The theory of evolution tells us how life evolved. It includes a mechanism. Goddidit doesn't.

It agrees with Darwin's original premise, that life developed by the same general mechanism as the physics and chemistry which proceeded it.

Which in his day of course meant a handful of simple immutable laws, and lots of time and space to randomly bump around in

Today it means by finely tuned information, detailed specific instructions, directing and predetermining precisely how and when development occurs.

A little more promising than 'chance done it' don't you think?

So where's this mathematical formulation of ID?

as above, that's the advantage of creative intelligence, it operates without the restrictions of mathematical formulations, it designs them

Along with the genetic evidence, the comparative anatomy / physiology / embryology / biochemistry evidence, the biogeographical evidence, and the fact that we can witness evolution occurring, it's more of the evidence for the correctness of the theory of biological evolution.

Consilience - agreement between the approaches to a topic of different academic subjects.

When all of the evidence coming from multiple, independent lines of research points in the same direction, the likelihood of the conclusions drawn from it is much stronger than any single aspect considered alone.

Agreed, and when a theory conflicts with several separate lines of evidence, the opposite is true

Darwinism doesn't agree very well with any of the lines of evidence independently, far less collectively, it has to increasingly amend the fossil record, the models, and the direct experimentation with various speculative patches, to try to adjust to the reality of modern science, to the point that even Darwinists don't agree on it any more

So no answer as to why we should throw out what works for what doesn't? I'm guessing that that is because like Deeje and me, you have none.

None at all, and so we all agree, lets keep the science, the method we all know and love, and leave Darwinism to the dustbin of Victorian age theories that didn't pan out

Deeje · Oct 30, 2017

It Aint Necessarily So said:
You are aware, aren't you, that many of us reject any idea believed by faith or any idea derived from an idea believed by faith. Any other belief grounded in faith is just as (in)valid as yours. Even if one chooses to disregard all of the evidence, by faith alone, one can believe that creationism is false.

I am aware that the posters on this thread might be a bit set in their thinking, so it isn't that I am fooling myself with any ideas of conversion in any of you.....but there may be some readers here who do not post, who might be able to see through the pathetic excuses that evolutionists bring up to reinforce all this "evidence" that their theory is correct and beyond question to anyone who has intelligence....yet when asked to produce it, what do we see? A belief system masquerading as scientific fact. Those who believe in an Intelligent Designer have way more proof for his existence than you do for the monumental accident you think creation is. We don't need to have science degrees to understand what is right under our noses. Obviously you do.

Science has a become the religion of the educated.....and an excuse for the uneducated to ditch belief in God. When you throw God and his rules out the window, what takes their place? Look around you.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
There is no evidence for intelligent design. Ask the Discovery Institute. They've invested millions trying to find some and have come up as empty as those looking for the fountain of youth so many centuries ago

Well, the last time I looked, science has also invested millions trying to prove that evolution ever happened. As far as I can see, they have wasted their money. There is as yet no "proof" and science keeps telling us that. You have what we have.....beliefs, based on what others have taught you. You don't have any more proof that your beliefs are correct, than we do. That is hard for you to admit, isn't it?

If your idea is wrong, nature won't provide you with evidence that it is correct. How could it?

Nature does indeed provide all we need to see design and ingenuity in action. Its everywhere.
According to evolutionists, there is no design...its all just a series of very fortunate chance mutations and "natural selection" with no indication of what "natural" even means in that context.

You explain mechanisms that may or may not have taken place over all those millions of years. There is no way to verify if any of it is true, so where is all this "evidence" really? Its a mountain of pure suggestion.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Well, the scientists have that, and to some, that matters. Some people come to conclusions and make decisions based on evidence. For others, who trust faith, evidence is irrelevant.

Faith requires evidence too...or it is blind. God does not want blind faith....he wants those who have their perceptions trained in the right way. Science can help us to see the ingenuity in nature that is not always visible to the naked eye. It deepens our appreciation for the Creator, rather than to detract from it.
Our ability to learn and our natural curiosity is implanted in us, so that life could be an everlasting, awe inspiring series of discoveries. Living forever here on planet earth will be a never-ending journey of discovery and no doubt, science will play a vital role in our understanding.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Yet the science community hasn't embraced intelligent design, and their profession is to evaluate evidence.

IMO, the scientific community is so self-absorbed, that it can't see past the end of its collective nose.
When egos drive....there is a fool at the wheel.

Deeje · Oct 30, 2017

SkepticThinker said:
I'm sorry but this post is ludicrous. Science isn't conducted by one man. Once again, you're forcing your religious principles/dogma/beliefs onto a methodology that operates nothing like religion does.

I believe it operates exactly like a religion. It uses indoctrination from an early and impressionable age, and it relies on its 'gods' to supply information and ideas about many things.....it even has its temples where all go to worship science and seek to examine the miracles of nature....attributing all the glory to their science gods for making a Creator unnecessary.
Isn't "Mother Nature" wonderful?

BTW, I never said anything about 'one man'. The generator of the world's evil is one entity, but he isn't a man....and he is supported by his minions. (not to be confused with "Despicable Me" characters)

(If only they were that cute......)

Some of his minions are human, others are not.
What dictator could ever rule without his henchmen...and devotees?

The Creator is the inventor of science....it forms the basis for the assembly of all matter in existence. You think that what exists is all the result of undirected chance, but no assembly of matter that produces mechanics, fails to have a mechanic. What mechanical thing on earth was the result of a chance meeting of molecules?
We are talking miracles here....but you just call them something else.

SkepticThinker said:
You've just repeated the same things you've been saying over and over since page one, despite the the fact that I (and so many others) have addressed them so many times. Your claims are not backed by evidence. Sorry.

Your 'addressing' them accomplished what? Are they convincing anyone that wasn't already convinced? If any were impressed with what you produced as "evidence", I am sure that you were just preaching to the converted.

SkepticThinker said:
I mean, seriously, I've addressed every single one of these bogus claims, more than twice. And you just keep on making them. It's like a merry-go-round.

Tell me about it.....

SkepticThinker said:
I was speaking directly to your comments that no amount of evidence will ever be able to convince you about the reality of evolution.

That is because there is no evidence that does not rely on what science assumes, rather than what it can actually prove. If there was conclusive, fully substantiated evidence for either side of this issue, it would have been produced by now......so the one side making all the claims to have "evidence" hasn't produced any yet that were not suggestions masquerading as facts.

You claim not to have a belief system.....yet you cannot substantiate science's claims with anything more than supposition....this must be difficult for you guys because you are probably used to creationists crumbling at your feet.
I can clearly see what's crumbling.....and it isn't ID.

Hockeycowboy · Oct 30, 2017

ArtieE said:
Intelligent Design is a scientific theory.

Wow! Thanks for admitting that!

A Freudian slip, maybe?

It Aint Necessarily So · Oct 30, 2017

Deeje said:
Science has a become the religion of the educated

The educated increasingly eschew religion.

Deeje said:
an excuse for the uneducated to ditch belief in God.

Which is it then - the educated or uneducated?

Deeje said:
When you throw God and his rules out the window, what takes their place?

Secular humanism, in my case.

Deeje said:
You explain mechanisms that may or may not have taken place over all those millions of years.

Those mechanism are taking place now under our noses.

Deeje said:
Faith requires evidence too...or it is blind.

As soon as you have evidence, you no longer have or need faith.

Deeje said:
When egos drive....there is a fool at the wheel.

Yes, indeed. What's needed is a rational mind guided by a firm commitment to reason rather than emotional needs. Wouldn't you agree?

Profound Realization · Oct 30, 2017

SkepticThinker said:
In all of these words, you didn't really answer any of my questions. Rather, you've just gone on to speculate even further.
On what basis do you make these claims?
Can you give an example of "positive" information and "negative" information?

What you are describing is a conspiracy. You're saying that all of the scientists currently working all over the world (and over the last 150+ years when it comes to evolutionary theory) collectively ignore "negative" information and only publish and promote "positive" information. Do you have any idea how many people would have to be involved in such a covering up of data and how long a time period we are talking about here?

Nothing is even being speculated. How many examples do you need of "scientists" themselves wishing negative information/findings were published or examples of "scientists" having their negative information/findings rejected in publishment? Seek for yourself.... have you refused to? If you care to reason or communicate with another more effectively and honestly, it's very helpful if you don't misconstrue things said and you do some reading/work yourself into publication bias. Just a suggestion though.

No, what "you" are describing is a conspiracy by misunderstanding what was said.

ImmortalFlame · Oct 31, 2017

Profound Realization said:
Nothing is even being speculated. How many examples do you need of "scientists" themselves wishing negative information/findings were published or examples of "scientists" having their negative information/findings rejected in publishment? Seek for yourself.... have you refused to? If you care to reason or communicate with another more effectively and honestly, it's very helpful if you don't misconstrue things said and you do some reading/work yourself into publication bias. Just a suggestion though.

No, what "you" are describing is a conspiracy by misunderstanding what was said.

Summary:

"It's not my fault I'm not answering your questions! It's your fault for not doing the work to justify my claims! I don't have to demonstrate or explain anything - you should do all the work for me, and if you don't it means you're biased or dishonest!"

Sounds like you're blaming other people for you own mistakes, doesn't it?

Deeje · Oct 31, 2017

It Aint Necessarily So said:
The educated increasingly eschew religion.

Thankfully, not all the educated eschew religion......but no surprises there....Jesus deliberately chose uneducated men to be his disciples.
Jesus said that in order to become a follower of his, we had to become as young children. What is there about children that makes them teachable? They don't have a lot of their own ideas to get in the way.

It was evidently a Jewish "thing" to want to be the greatest in a group and Jesus had to sort that out amongst his disciples (Mark 9:33-35)......imagine if they had been educated!?

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Which is it then - the educated or uneducated?

Both. The educated have talked themselves out of belief in God....and the uneducated have used their ideas to dispense with him also. Its a win-win for the ruler of this world. (1 John 5:19)

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Secular humanism, in my case.

Do you represent all humanity then? Are you even typical of what the average person may come to think and feel once they have dispensed with God?

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Those mechanism are taking place now under our noses.

Can you show me any creature that is in the process of evolving....? If the missing links are all still missing in the fossil record....then where will I find them today? If we have 'mechanisms' that are taking place right now....who is the mechanic?

It Aint Necessarily So said:
As soon as you have evidence, you no longer have or need faith.

I have, and need both. My faith is bolstered by the amazing facets of creation itself. I have all the evidence I require to know my God. I also have his guiding hand in my life in a very real way.
I have avoided many pitfalls in my life by simple observing the Bible's laws and principles.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
What's needed is a rational mind guided by a firm commitment to reason rather than emotional needs. Wouldn't you agree?

I have a rational mind, because I am guided by the one who made it. He gave me my intellect and he also gave me emotions.....do you imagine we don't need both? I couldn't imagine life if everyone was devoid of emotions.

"What the world needs now is love, sweet love....but that's the only thing that there's just too little of...." (showing my age now)

Imagine a world where love was the dominant emotion and humans were perfectly balanced in their attitudes and conduct.....would you not like to live in such a world? :shrug:

That would mean no wars, no crime, racism or violence, no pollution, no domestic disputes, peace among humans and in the animal kingdom, and a perfect government to rule over us.....this is what the Creator promises.
Everything in me is attracted to that idea.

Altfish · Oct 31, 2017

Deeje said:
Imagine a world where love was the dominant emotion and humans were perfectly balanced in their attitudes and conduct.....would you not like to live in such a world? That would mean no wars, no crime, racism or violence, no pollution, no domestic disputes, peace among humans and in the animal kingdom, and a perfect government to rule over us.....this is what the Creator promises.
Everything in me is attracted to that idea.

Your creator isn't doing very well currently is he/she? Please don't try to blame it on those who have turned away from the creator.

Of course we all want what you describe but why is a belief in god necessary for what you describe? Humanists seek just a world but do it without the need for reference to a supreme being.

Profound Realization · Oct 31, 2017

ImmortalFlame said:
Summary:

"It's not my fault I'm not answering your questions! It's your fault for not doing the work to justify my claims! I don't have to demonstrate or explain anything - you should do all the work for me, and if you don't it means you're biased or dishonest!"

Sounds like you're blaming other people for you own mistakes, doesn't it?

Summary: you're great at seeing things that aren't there, this time pulling words like "fault and blame" out of thin air, misconstruing and twisting someone's words, being arrogant, authoritarian..... and excepting answers in the meantime and wondering why it's not even worth the time or of any fruit to answer. No, thanks. At this point, mutual honesty has been broken in communication from the start. If anyone of this nature wishes to continue or is genuine about having a decent debate/conversation, they can quit being lazy and attempt to understand something before responding with misconstruing/ twisting of words, and arrogance. I understand that self-control is difficult. Take care.

ImmortalFlame · Oct 31, 2017

Profound Realization said:
Summary: you're great at seeing things that aren't there, this time pulling words like "fault and blame" out of thin air, misconstruing and twisting someone's words, being arrogant, authoritarian..... and excepting answers in the meantime and wondering why it's not even worth the time or of any fruit to answer. No, thanks. At this point, mutual honesty has been broken in communication from the start. If anyone of this nature wishes to continue or is genuine about having a decent debate/conversation, they can quit being lazy and attempt to understand something before responding with misconstruing/ twisting of words, and arrogance. I understand that self-control is difficult. Take care.

Yet more blaming other people for you own shortcomings.

If you can't answer questions without getting defensive, you really aren't equipped for mature debate. Still, I'll miss you!

metis · Oct 31, 2017

Deeje said:
Perhaps this is why I find science's explanation of how evolution supposedly took place, so empty.....it is a belief system founded on an idea....but when you examine the foundations of this elaborate 'building', you find nothing but matchsticks.

As one who taught the subject for roughly 30 years, I never had any problems whatsoever getting loads of information on the various aspects of the ToE. Matter of fact, I had to streamline the info I gave my students because of time constraints. Speaking of which...

I taught an average of 4 sections of anthropology per year, with a rough average of 25 students per course, and I did this for about 30 years. At the very beginning and end of each course, I had students fill out confidential questionnaires, and one of the questions I asked was "Do you believe evolution happened?". I defined "evolution" for them as there being genetic changes that could lead to the formation of new species (kinds).

With the surveys at the beginning of the course, there was usually a relatively equal three-way split, with about 1/3 saying yes, 1/3 saying no, and 1/3 saying they didn't know. At the end of the course, the results were dramatically different, with only one person in all those years saying no. The "I don't know" group was almost nil.

So, either I'm maybe the greatest salesperson who ever walked this Earth (although the Donald might disagree) or that the massive information on evolution speaks for itself. As one who grew up in a church that taught that evolution of species didn't happen, including the fact that I had serious thoughts about going into the ministry, when I actually did the studying I found out what I eventually came to teach-- it has happened and continues to happen.

But if one doesn't study the massive amount of evidence, preferring instead to blindly believe their "religious" teachers instead of scientists who specialize in the various forms of evolution-related biology that are found in science, then they're pretty much stuck in a Dark Age mentality, and that's through their own choice! That's like deciding and saying "I choose to be ignorant".

ArtieE · Oct 31, 2017

Deeje said:
Evolutionists are quick to point out that this is not based on "real science".....but then, their theory is not based on "real science" either. Both are basically 'belief systems' looking for scientific evidence to support their respective beliefs, but only one is claiming to be faith based. Evolutionary science too, is "faith" based....but can't admit it.
You have to have faith in the words and findings of evolutionary scientists and in the validity of their interpretation of it. You trust them and have actually placed your life and future in their hands. That is how important this issue is IMO.

So there you have it.

I believe I am the natural result of my parents and they are the natural result of my grandparents and they are the natural result of my great-grandparents and so on back to the first cell. I am just waiting for somebody to prove to me that my great-grandparents were designed and created by a god instead of being a natural result of my great-great-grandparents. When I get that proof I will become a theist.

Guy Threepwood · Oct 31, 2017

ArtieE said:
I believe I am the natural result of my parents and they are the natural result of my grandparents and they are the natural result of my great-grandparents and so on back to the first cell. I am just waiting for somebody to prove to me that my great-grandparents were designed and created by a god instead of being a natural result of my great-great-grandparents. When I get that proof I will become a theist.

So you believe that the design for a cell morphed into your grandparents, through millions of accidental mutations?

But you do not require proof to believe this, so is it just a matter of your personal preference?

ArtieE · Oct 31, 2017

Deeje said:
You can't ask the bigger question about how life began, because science has no idea really.....try as they might, they cannot make anything 'live', unless it was taken from something already alive....they know for sure that "all life springs from pre-existing life"....and yet this apparently doesn't apply to evolution, because if life was created by an Intelligent Designer, then their whole theory goes down the gurgler.

Please everybody read post 4960 where I wrote: "For all evolutionists care the first cell could have been genetically engineered by aliens. They are only concerned with how it evolved. And I invite everybody reading this to check how many times this has been explained to Deeje earlier."

And here in this post she repeats the same nonsense again.

ArtieE · Oct 31, 2017

Guy Threepwood said:
exactly, why would we throw out the only known explanation that is a proven phenomena, actually concurs with all the scientific evidence AS IS, and is also proven to be capable of creating the information systems essential to life in the first place

and instead put it all down to a theory driven by blind chance, demanding belief in countless creatures, transitions, lucky mutations, that can never be scientifically verified, and utterly fails to offer any explanation for the actual origin of life itself?

As for receiving credence, belief in Darwinism stands at 19% in the US, and that's WITH all the pop science media and school curriculum, - ID is not the theory desperately struggling with credibility here!

"According to a recent Pew Research Center report, 73 percent of American adults younger than 30 expressed some sort of belief in evolution, a jump from 61 percent in 2009, the first year in which the question was asked. The number who believed in purely secular evolution (that is, not directed by any divine power) jumped from 40 percent to a majority of 51 percent. In other words, if you ask a younger American how humans arose, you’re likely to get an answer that has nothing to do with God."
Evolution Is Finally Winning Out Over Creationism, Especially Among the Young

ArtieE · Oct 31, 2017

Deeje said:
Intelligent Design assumes the existence of an Intelligent Designer......I am not confusing anything. Perhaps you are confused?

No, I'm afraid you are again. You said and I quote:

"WHY?.......because Intelligent Design is what makes logical sense to a spiritually minded person looking at creation and knowing that blind chance could not have produced even a minute part of it.....and because our suggestions fit the data just as well as science's suggestions do.....and because it isn't useless....it give us a reason for our being and something to pin our faith and hopes on."

ID is a scientific theory and doesn't provide any "reason for our being and something to pin our faith and hopes on." That would be your belief in your god and your religion.

Guy Threepwood · Oct 31, 2017

ArtieE said:
"According to a recent Pew Research Center report, 73 percent of American adults younger than 30 expressed some sort of belief in evolution, a jump from 61 percent in 2009, the first year in which the question was asked. The number who believed in purely secular evolution (that is, not directed by any divine power) jumped from 40 percent to a majority of 51 percent. In other words, if you ask a younger American how humans arose, you’re likely to get an answer that has nothing to do with God."
Evolution Is Finally Winning Out Over Creationism, Especially Among the Young

And Santa is doing very well with the 5 year olds I hear. If you have to cherry pick the youngest block to get the desired answer, that's not necessarily a good sign!

I believed in evolution hook line and sinker when I was a kid also

ArtieE · Oct 31, 2017

Deeje said:
Those who believe in an Intelligent Designer have way more proof for his existence than you do for the monumental accident you think creation is. We don't need to have science degrees to understand what is right under our noses. Obviously you do.

OK, say all scientists believed in the existence of an Intelligent Designer. Then what? How to proceed from there?

Just Accidental?

Avid Bible Student

Mighty Pirate

Avid Bible Student

Avid Bible Student

Witness for Jehovah

Veteran Member

Active Member

Woke gremlin

Avid Bible Student

Veteran Member

Active Member

Woke gremlin

aged ecumenical anthropologist

Well-Known Member

Mighty Pirate

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Mighty Pirate

Well-Known Member