1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Existence

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by Jimmy, Sep 19, 2021.

  1. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    6,467
    Ratings:
    +338
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    But you are a human you include yourself twice yet you are only one human pretending you talk on behalf of women as human life continuance by sex. As two humans first.

    Consciousness human is naturally aware first gives natural observations all FIRST as titles.

    Why. A theist. Human. Why is a question as it is a human answer.

    Egotism your thoughts did not invent me.

    Maths is thought calculated needs a human to apply.

    Water changed he says. Water never changed it always is and was water.

    Theism lies.
     
  2. LactoseIntolerant

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2021
    Messages:
    69
    Ratings:
    +20
    Religion:
    Christian
    With the theory of design, I mean intelligent design (see keyword "Discovery Institute"). The idea is that innovations during a design process are kept for the next design. For example, the wheel is not reinvented in the design of the car. Why fix what ain't broke. That is why the DNA sequence of genes remains similar to some more primitive species, because the Designer passed on the design and not because the genes were inherited by sexual reproduction bounced around for a several billion years (see keyword abiogenesis with James Tour, irreducible complexity with Michael Behe, numerous books with Stephen Meyer, David Berlinski, Jonathan Wells etc...)

    Evolution is touted as design without a designer - time and changes acting on a bag of traits will eventually result in a different bag of traits (resulting in a new animal). This is darwinism. It is so simplistic that is it is laughable in this day and age. The new theory is neo-darwinism, and the bag of traits is replaced with chromosomes. The genetic make up is viewed as computer code, that is why many software engineers are kind of curious. If you ask "can you create a computer code by random processes to a software engineer, the answer is impossible. Only intelligence can create code. That is from where design comes-intelligence. Intelligence from whom? Well that is a whole new discussion.
     
    #182 LactoseIntolerant, Sep 21, 2021
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2021
  3. LactoseIntolerant

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2021
    Messages:
    69
    Ratings:
    +20
    Religion:
    Christian
    You speak like a groupie - singing praise of what you don't understand. Illiterate and proud of it.
    Don't spread your poison in these parts. Know your evolution - calling the Creator random is a no no of damnable proportion.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. LactoseIntolerant

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2021
    Messages:
    69
    Ratings:
    +20
    Religion:
    Christian
    First what does chaos theory have to do with this OP?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    47,981
    Ratings:
    +29,458
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Intelligent design is not a scientific theory. There is no scientific evidence for it. The only version that even tried to be scientific was refuted twenty years ago.

    And no, evolution is not "darwinism". Darwin was amazingly ahead of his time but he did not know about genetics. The theory has gotten much stronger over the years.

    You are merely repeating long ago refuted claims by creationists.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    47,981
    Ratings:
    +29,458
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Who knows? But you might want to look up the term.
     
  7. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    6,467
    Ratings:
    +338
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Humans in science the status law in creation speaking says first two humans in biological science are deceased.

    History of humans all deceased for however long ago. Might be a million years itself no one knows.

    In ology talking terms humans are only one sperm one ovary as any one human self.

    Human Information about one subject only as a human.

    One subject said science. When I discuss one subject I mean only the one subject. The law of science correctness. The topic human.

    It cannot include Multi other subjects you would be lying outright.

    Law in human science practice.

    Man human scientist. Living.

    Topic of one body. The man. A human man. An alive human man. Topic detailed 100 per cent non argued advice.

    Live supported by a water oxygenated heavens mass with trees oxygenating water.

    I own life by two pre living humans. One a man one a woman had sex. Scientific observation their man baby. They age.
    They die.
    They had sex whilst their human body allowed conception.

    My one man body self scientific observation. No argument allowed.

    Laws in human science said for human life continuance as scientific advice human.
     
  8. LactoseIntolerant

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2021
    Messages:
    69
    Ratings:
    +20
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yes, I read the dictionary. Do you not know from where the definition was popularized? Or are you just a user of digested phrases?
    From your knowledge of chaos theory, I can see the depth of your scholarship. It is late, but leave a message, I am curious what a wordsmith understands. I will respond ASAP.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    6,467
    Ratings:
    +338
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Theist in man science.

    I observe one only cell body I look at.

    I detail all of its one body presence. State it is a natural body I observe as a human.

    A human owns seeing. My brain and hearing dependent on my brain mind.

    I can only see the truth. Whole form.

    I build machines to purposely look at small forms. My choice.

    I see two cells. My consciousness says I see two cells. Both are separate.

    I preach the law of separation is a design fact.

    I see it is real.as I personally compare one cell to the other cell.

    However I want to know why.

    So why is first a question and not an answer.

    Theism.

    Atmosphere owns water that as a God holy water spirit I said never changed. Water is always water.

    I know what oxygen is also. Oxygen a state.

    No changes

    What I continue to live with and because of water and oxygen.

    I discuss light natural as a gas burning voided constant. Not science.

    I infer I want to know. I state I experiment with machine use.

    Reasoning told. As I don't know.

    First human conscious advice. Consciousness said natural first aware highest with God states I don't know.

    Radiation one answer is just radiation.

    Any one cell you look at you give it a one single name.

    We live in holy water.

    Evaporation to remove water is to change water as it's presence with us.

    Science said water taken off the ground changed life on earth. Life once only lived in water.

    We still live under water.

    Water mass pressure water by mass owns its natural water by mass life.

    Has nothing to do with our heavens water life.

    Talking about poison is naturally thought as a threat in reading. If you have no rational reason to use the term then why use it?

    If you think I own the female human design answer I quote human sex is.

    Any human intelligent or a low life intelligence is living today because of human sex and not any satanic maths theory of how to change by knowledge to anti form.

    Pretending if you destroy it then you built it by scientific technology as a human.

    Using machine experiments instead of living a natural mutual equal life with a human female.

    The bible said science is the destroyer as gods earth body had sealed out evil.

    Theists state the preceding higher radiating body is God volcanic in science strings.

    In our heavenly atmosphere oxygen is stated separately to water. Two forms protecting life

    Monkeys don't do science.
     
  10. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    47,981
    Ratings:
    +29,458
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I have doubt if you did. It is a popular phrase to use when someone is wrong in every single aspect is a post. It has nothing to do with chaos theory itself.

    The point is that you were laughably wrong in that post. The theory of evolution is very strongly based upon the scientific method. It is not scientism. And there is more scientific evidence for it than almost any other idea in science.

    If you had studied this topic at all you would know of the embarrassing failures of Michael Behe for example. And Meyers, and Berlinski. Behe for example took a series of new discoveries at the time and made the mistake of assuming that scientists would never solve them. That was foolish of him. One thing that happens quite often in the sciences is that new discoveries, which are almost always never fully understood at first is that they do find explanations for those new discoveries. Many were already explained before his book was published and all have been explained since. His claim was that there was no possible way that they could have passed a certain step and ways that they could have were found. His error in thinking was demonstrated with a simple mousetrap.

    By the way, if you just used the dictionary for the phrase "fractally wrong" then you almost certainly went to the wrong source:

    Fractal wrongness - RationalWiki
     
  11. Ponder This

    Ponder This Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,768
    Ratings:
    +515
    I've never had a reason to outright reject ToE.
    But there are aspects of the theory that are problematic and/or misunderstood. For example, "survival of the fittest".

    It's the nature of science that it is subject to revision and improvement as our understanding of the world improves. So I'm perfectly content to allow the Theory of Evolution (which concerns itself with the process of change in all forms of life over generations) to gradually improve itself over time.

    The creation of the Earth itself isn't even a matter of ToE, but rather of Cosmology. ToE doesn't come into play until life emerges.
    Additional theory is actually required to explain how life emerged. For example, abiogenesis. And what is abiogenesis? At some point in the past there was no life, and then at some point there was life and somehow it went from the one to the other. And there are a bunch of guesses as to how that happened, but it's not like anybody can verify or falsify the method. There are no naturally occurring examples of abiogenesis that occur today that we know of.

    I think one of things people like to say to try and throw people off is they say the creation stories don't explain dinosaurs and then they like to talk about how old dinosaurs are and how your creation account can't possibly be true, etc, etc. But it's not like, for example, the Bible doesn't mention large monsters (*cough* Leviathan *cough*) nor does the Bible account for every animal that lived. Should I decide the platypus doesn't exist just because the platypus is never mentioned in the Bible? :rolleyes: But here are a bunch of things that lived and we should be concerned that the Bible didn't mention them because... dun dun dunnn! They are dead! :eek:

    So it really comes down to Age of the Earth. This is the rock solid argument. And this is really not an Evolution argument. This is actually a Geological argument.

    So I would suggest that if you rejected ToE because of Creation stories, then you are really in the wrong department altogether. It's not Evolution that you have a problem with. It's Geology. Because Geology is what actually tells us all these things took billions of years, whereas some Creationists seem to think the time elapsed since the start of life on Earth is only some thousands of years or whatever. I don't understand the intimate details of how creationists come up with their estimates for the age of the "Earth". It certainly isn't obviously apparent from a casual read of the Bible. You have to really sit down and bean count and say what's a bean and what isn't to get those estimates and make an assumption or two here and there. It's basically using the Bible to do pseudo-science and different people get different answers depending on how they count. And in my opinion if different people sit down to count and consistently get different numbers at the end of it, it's not like I can trust what they did. They aren't God. They're just people. But maybe it works out to 6000 years or so or whatever. And is there anything spiritual about what they are doing? Maybe, but I don't see it.

    And there you have it. If you are going to buy what some people think they know about what they think the Bible tells them about how long they think things took instead of Geology, well, that's your choice.

    Or you could just accept that the Creation Story is basically true, Geology is basically true, ToE is basically true, Cosmology is basically true, and then work from there. Ask, what's actually important that I'm getting out of this? If it's the Bible, then the answer is: probably not science... probably I'm getting some sort of spiritual understanding... probably I'm cultivating my relationship to the divine... probably I'm using this to understand what it means to be human or to understand my place in this world I'm living in. I'm probably going to meditate on this or pray. I'm not likely to try to use the Bible to determine the rate of acceleration due to gravity. If I see someone else trying to use the Bible to determine the rate of acceleration due to gravity, well, I might get a little bit offended. You really shouldn't treat the Bible that way.
     
  12. RestlessSoul

    RestlessSoul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2021
    Messages:
    2,625
    Ratings:
    +2,173
    Religion:
    Agnostic Lapsed Catholic

    I predict that a Japanese trained horse will win the Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe. Might not be this year though.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    6,467
    Ratings:
    +338
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Do you know humans choose any topic of any subject. Just as a human.

    Science not a monkey practiced by humans says to a scientist owning human biology maybe a million years of human life has been lived just for comparing intellectual advice.

    Back in time humans lived for a million years.

    At the same time so were monkeys.

    Just human as a human for a long time in the past.

    Put all the human dead in a thesis would equal how much radiation back in time own their biological death. Today it would calculate instant death by maths.

    Rationally.

    Sex is why any life form continued as rationally in scientific intellect the past is all dead.

    Life once lived on planet earth.

    Sex is the new God in nature a human teaching ignored as biblical advice.

    It is both scientific and God statement correct.

    Thesis said garden nature dies also.

    When you don't read advice to take advice the human ego of I want ignored rational advice as it does not want rational.

    As theists use irrational information only.

    As a human has to physically apply I want by physical chosen human practice which is not science rationally as a thesis in any used quote.
     
  14. Jimmy

    Jimmy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2019
    Messages:
    3,107
    Ratings:
    +1,040
    Real life has taught me not the Bible. Geological or evolution whatever I’m not sweating little stuff
     
  15. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    47,981
    Ratings:
    +29,458
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Okay how did "real life" teach you? It sounds as if it really did not. If you really know something you will be able to support your claims. If all that you have is mere belief then you will fail. Scientific claims are based upon reality. Scientists have to be able to defend their ideas using evidence and reasoning.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Jimmy

    Jimmy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2019
    Messages:
    3,107
    Ratings:
    +1,040
    Dude it’s all good
    Science is cool
    No failing here
     
  17. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    6,467
    Ratings:
    +338
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    I am really a human really brother. Science says I am a living human.

    Scientist I believe I am an alien first inside the UFO radiating mass as theists. Also just humans.

    Why?

    I coerced you all talking about no physical presence of any natural types of anything I have pre science studied.

    I know it all exists naturally.

    I believe as a human theist of the big bang first blast when nothing else existed. Conned you all.

    Is actually theorising UFO mass radiation accumulating in our earth heavens.

    As I know I am only a human standing on planet earth inside water oxygen owning life scientific stated by human sex owns my life.

    100 years ago my self and all the selves agreeing in mind status false thesis never even existed.

    I know nature all died maybe about 500 years ago as physical form not definitive just a used small approximation to theory use of human intellect....and it re conceived itself as a type of thesis. I lie everyday.

    My real thesis is UFO mass accumulation.
     
  18. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,669
    Ratings:
    +9,591
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Despite the evidence?

    Why do you believe A when the evidence tells you the correct answer is B?
    Do you consider that sensible and rational?
     
  19. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,669
    Ratings:
    +9,591
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Because literally all evidence of reality contradicts it.
     
  20. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,669
    Ratings:
    +9,591
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Evolution has loads of independently verifiable evidence and makes testable predictions.

    God is just faith based religious belief. Unfalsifiable, unverifiable and the literal beliefs being stated here are also contradicted by literally all evidence of reality, which supports evolution instead.
     
Loading...