• 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!

Just Accidental?

Status
Not open for further replies.

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
But what if you only have two choices....is "I dunno" a good place to sit on the fence? What if there is no fence?

If there's no fence, you don't have a problem.

Who said anyone has to change their beliefs? If you have settled on what you are sure is the truth, then like the rest of us you will either stand or fall by your conviction.

I'm still standing.

That macro-evolution is undisputed in the scientific community means little to the Creator.

And that opinion means little to the scientific community.

Popular opinion has a way of letting people down. If you were all wrong, what was the point of the unity?

Popular opinion hasn't let me down except for the odd movie that was recommended but that I didn't care for.

What makes critical thinkers and rational skeptics think they are right?

My beliefs correlate to reality beautifully. Objectivity is a difficult position to define. Everyone has a vested interest in what they believe....even if its only the smugness of being right (in their own eyes)

I assume that you are only referring to others when you call thinking that you are right "smugness."

No one is forcing them on you. Your free will is respected. Your choices are yours to make. But you have to deal with the consequences either way. Every decision we make has an outcome.....expected or not.

Thanks for all of the life advice, but I've been doing pretty well with my present set of values and methods. My choices have been mostly good ones, and the mistakes weren't very costly.

If your heart is not drawn to God, there is nothing left to say. The mind (no matter how intelligent it m has little to do with what the heart dictates.

I also have my own thoughts in that department.

The Christian message always seems to be so threatening. You're whole post is basically, "You had better watch out."
 
Last edited:

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So how do random mutations along with natural selection paint such a detailed picture without getting it wrong in so many ways and so often and ruining the picture to be useless as a deterrent and not selected?
The mechanisms by which useful features are acquired and 'mistakes' eliminated has been explained to you a hundred times. How can you not get it, unless you're determined from the outset not to get it?
And then you have the temerity to complain about being criticized as 'not understanding evolution'.

Becuase random mutations do not know what is needed such as having the vision of the entire mural in mind when constructing the picture they will throw up any number of shapes and colours as blobs on the wings which have no meaning. How does it produce such fine detail in the colour of red on the flies nose which identifies the particular fly?
If you don't know the answer to this by now there's obviously no way to get through to you. You're impervious to both facts and explanations. You're arguing from both ignorance and personal incredulity.
Aside: I'm not seeing these 'highly detailed flies'. Perhaps I need new glasses.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
What happens to scientists who dare to speak about Intelligent Design? They lose their job?
jawsmiley.gif


I found this documentary on YouTube.


How scientifically verifiable is macro-evolution really if you can't even mention Intelligent Design without risking your scientific career?
This "documentary" is garbage. Many scientists featured in it have come out and said they're interviews were edited and their words misrepresented.
And if you actually look further into the stories the people tell about being fired - you'll find that they're also not represented very honestly.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
So you don't believe in the heaven and hell narrative of the New Testament. Okay then.

Matthew 25:46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” Also Matthew 25:41, Mark 9:43, etc.

Go back to Eden and tell me where Adam and Eve were ever told about going to heaven...or hell?

Look at the OT and tell me where any pre-Christian servant of the God of Israel ever talked about going to heaven...or hell?

The first mention of humans going to heaven is in the NT. But the disciples of Jesus had no real comprehension of what he meant about the location of the Kingdom, until Pentecost, when the holy spirit opened up their understanding and gave them a strong desire to go there. And even then, it was a case of being chosen by God for a specific role as a "priest and ruler" with Christ in his Kingdom. (Revelation 20:6) They finally understood that this kingdom would rule the earth...extending their rulership from heaven. (Revelation 21:1-5)

Those selected in this finite group started with the 12 apostles and were added to until the ranks were filled.
As with all kingdoms or governmental arrangements, there has to be subjects to rule over....and as they are also "priests", there will have to be sinners for whom to perform their duties.

You will see the two destinies in the scripture you quoted...."eternal punishment" (in this case is "gehenna" not hades) means eternal death as an opposite of eternal life. There never was a "heaven or hell" scenario in the Bible...that was invented by Christendom when it adopted the concept from the Greeks. Hellenism greatly influenced both Judaism and Christianity as far as belief in life after death was concerned. The Bible does not teach that humans have an immortal soul that survives death. (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10; Ezekiel 18:4)

"Sheol" (Hebrew) "hades" and "gehenna" (Greek) are all translated "hell" in most Bibles......their meanings are different.
Understanding the difference is vital to identifying the truth about death.

If you read the Bible you will see that most of what Christendom teaches does not originate in the scriptures.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
How much design do we actually see in nature?

The Landing Strategy of the Honeybee


102017047_univ_lsr_lg.jpg


HONEYBEES can safely land at virtually any angle without problems. How do they do it?

Consider: A safe landing requires that the honeybee reduce its approach speed to nearly zero before contact. One logical way to do this would be to measure two factors—flight speed and the distance to the target—and then reduce speed accordingly. However, that method would be difficult for most insects because they have close-set, fixed-focus eyes that cannot directly measure distance.

The vision of honeybees is very different from that of humans who use binocular vision. Honeybees seem to use the simple fact that an object appears to get bigger as they approach it. The closer they get to an object, the faster it seems to increase in size. Experiments conducted at the Australian National University indicate that the honeybee decreases its flight speed so that the rate of apparent enlargement of an object remains constant. By the time the honeybee reaches its target, its speed has decreased to almost zero, allowing it to land safely.

The journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reports: “The simplicity and generality of this landing strategy . . . [make] it ideal for implementation in the guidance systems of flying robots.”

What do you think? Did the honeybee’s landing strategy evolve? Or was it designed?

The Landing Strategy of the Honeybee | Was It Designed?
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/awake-no2-2017-april/honeybee-landing-strategy/
Why do humans need degrees in science to copy what was not "designed" by an intelligent mind in the first place?
 

Darkstorn

This shows how unique i am.
What do you think? Did the honeybee’s landing strategy evolve? Or was it designed?

It evolved. Just like your ability to use biased sources as supposedly valid evidence is a result of evolution rather than design... Or at best evidence for a bad design.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
This is a scanned page from a 4th grade Christian science textbook published by Bob Jones University (Science 4 Student Text (2nd ed.) (softbound) | BJU Press).

4hfC6.jpg

Thanks for that. That's not particularly surprising, is it? It's a Christian school and text. It misprepresents our understanding of electricity and electromagnetism - probably in an effort to suggest a comparison between two unseen sources of power. That's the problem. It just keeps the kids behind:

Evolution [cartoon]
 

Thumper

Thank the gods I'm an atheist
Thanks for that. That's not particularly surprising, is it? It's a Christian school and text. It misprepresents our understanding of electricity and electromagnetism - probably in an effort to suggest a comparison between two unseen sources of power. That's the problem. It just keeps the kids behind:

Evolution [cartoon]
It is also a scary example of the mindset we face on boards like this where it seems all religulous are science deniers. (PS, loved your cartoon)
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
It evolved. Just like your ability to use biased sources as supposedly valid evidence is a result of evolution rather than design... Or at best evidence for a bad design.

But of course your 'sources' wouldn't be biased at all...would they? :D

Do you believe that amoebas evolved into dinosaurs? Can you prove it?

No design you say?

images
images
images
images
images
images


That is easy to say until you really look at them.....these guys just 'designed' themselves, did they?
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
This is a scanned page from a 4th grade Christian science textbook published by Bob Jones University (Science 4 Student Text (2nd ed.) (softbound) | BJU Press).

Here is a 4th grade evolutionary science explanation for kids....
Evolution: Online Lessons for Students: Lesson 3

spacer.gif
"The Earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old. Modern humans have only been around for .0002 percent of that time, and recorded history covers only a fraction of that. How do we know what the early Earth looked like? How do we know how living things evolve?

The evolution of complex organisms, such as humans, is so gradual that no one can watch it. But evolution does leave evidence. Scientists search for clues embedded in rock, encoded in DNA, and in the shape and structure of living things. In these activities, you will learn how scientists collect evidence for evolution."

Then there is an exercise for them......

"Activity 2: Evidence for Evolution WebQuest

Theodosius Dobzhansky, a geneticist whose work influenced 20th century research on evolutionary theory, said, "Nothing in biology makes sense, except in light of evolution." This quote emphasizes the role of evolution as the most important unifying principle in biology. Living things might, at first, seem very diverse, but closer inspection reveals a surprising unity. This unity, or common ancestry, can be explained by evolutionary theory. With such an important theory at stake, it is essential to understand the evidence upon which it is based."

(Note the language.....is this leading the children to conclusions from real evidence or is it more by suggestion about "such an important theory"?)


Here is an example of how they explain the evidence....


So many intermediate forms have been discovered between fish and amphibians, between amphibians and reptiles, between reptiles and mammals, and along the primate lines of descent that it often is difficult to identify categorically when the transition occurs from one to another particular species. Actually, nearly all fossils can be regarded as intermediates in some sense; they are life forms that come between the forms that preceded them and those that followed.

The fossil record thus provides consistent evidence of systematic change through time--of descent with modification. From this huge body of evidence, it can be predicted that no reversals will be found in future paleontological studies. That is, amphibians will not appear before fishes, nor mammals before reptiles, and no complex life will occur in the geological record before the oldest eucaryotic cells. This prediction has been upheld by the evidence that has accumulated until now: no reversals have been found."

The "overwhelming" evidence in the fossil record is actually nothing of the sort. If anything it is extremely disappointing from the evolutionary perspective. The predictions have been made to fit in with the interpretation of the evidence. So what you guys are teaching kids is more fantasy than teaching them about an Intelligent Designer.

 

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
The "overwhelming" evidence in the fossil record is actually nothing of the sort. If anything it is extremely disappointing from the evolutionary perspective. The predictions have been made to fit in with the interpretation of the evidence. So what you guys are teaching kids is more fantasy than teaching them about an Intelligent Designer.
Now that's hilarious. You complain about an alleged lack of evidence, but then when you cite a source that describes some of this evidence all you can muster in response is nothing more than "No it's not".

Can you imagine yourself at a scientific conference, and (during the Q&A) after an evolutionary biologist's presentation where he outlines some of the evidence, you stand up and say "Your evidence is nothing of the sort" and sit back down? Do you think anyone in the audience would find your "rebuttal" compelling?
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
It's so odd to see you, a person who's admitted that they could never compromise on this issue due to your religious beliefs, complaining about someone else being "biased".

If bias is a bad thing and is to be avoided, how do explain your own approach to this issue?

Why do all your responses to me begin with personal observations about my motives or my character? You have no personal flaws apparently, so you feel justified in attributing evil motives and flaws to a poster rather than just addressing the issues.

You speak of rebuttals but I haven't seen anything convincing from you so far.

I will never compromise my religious beliefs because I believe that they are true. Nature speaks about its Designer unless you have your fingers in your ears, whistling Dixie. Are you any different to me in that respect?

Accusing me of being biased when bias is clearly shown by evolutionists for their own beliefs is a little silly, don't you think? Who said bias was a bad thing in its proper place....who said it was to be avoided when kept in proper perspective?

It is ridiculous to think that any source provided by me would ever meet with your approval, and no source you provide, or have provided to date, has anything resembling irrefutable evidence for macro-evolution. You guys don't seem to be able to discern the difference between fact and suggestion. A prediction is not a fact just because a scientist interpreted evidence to fit it.

You have a house of cards.....impressive only to yourselves in your own ego driven world, but it lacks any real foundation. The storm that is coming will blow your house down.....but that is just my Bible oriented opinion. Time will tell, won't it? :)

in the meantime, I will examine the evidence for my Creator and others can make up their own minds.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
The Enteric Nervous System—Your Body’s “Second Brain”?

102017091_univ_lsr_lg.jpg


The enteric nervous system (ENS, shown in blue) is embedded in the digestive tract.


HOW many brains do you have? If you answer “one,” you are correct. Yet, there are other nervous systems in your body. One network of neurons is so extensive that some scientists have referred to it as a “second brain.” It is the enteric nervous system (ENS) and is located, not in your head, but mostly in your belly.

It takes an enormous amount of coordination and effort for the body to transform food into fuel. Hence, it is fitting that the brain is designed to delegate, as it were, most digestive control to the ENS.

While much simpler than the brain, the ENS is immensely complex. In humans, it is made up of an estimated 200 to 600 million neurons. This complex network of neurons is built into the digestive system. Scientists believe that if the function of the ENS were to take place in the brain, the needed nerves would be too thick. According to the book The Second Brain, “it is thus both safer and more convenient to let the [digestive system] look after itself.”

“A CHEMICAL WORKSHOP”
Food digestion requires a variety of very precise chemical mixtures produced at the right times and delivered to the right locations. Professor Gary Mawe aptly describes the digestive system as “a chemical workshop.” The sophistication of this chemical operation is mind-boggling. For instance, the intestinal wall is lined with specialized cells that act as chemical detectors, or taste receptors, identifying chemicals present in the food you eat. This data helps the ENS enlist the right digestive enzymes to break the food down into particles that the body can absorb. Also, the ENS plays a vital role in monitoring the acidity and other chemical properties of food particles and in adjusting the digestive enzymes accordingly.

Think of the digestive tract as a factory line managed mostly by the ENS. Your “second brain” moves food through the digestive system by directing the muscles along the wall of the digestive tract to contract. The ENS varies the strength and frequency of these muscle contractions as needed to make the system function like a line of conveyor belts.

The ENS also supervises safety functions. The food you swallow is likely to contain potentially harmful bacteria. It is no wonder that about 70 to 80 percent of your body’s lymphocyte cells—a vital component of your immune defense system—are housed inside your belly! If you ingest high levels of harmful organisms, the ENS protects the body by triggering powerful contractions that expel most of the toxic matter through vomiting or diarrhea.

GOOD COMMUNICATION
While the ENS seems to function independently of the brain, these two nerve centers engage in constant communication. For example, the ENS plays a role in the regulation of hormones that tell the brain when you should eat and how much you should eat. ENS nerve cells signal the brain when you are full and may possibly trigger nausea if you eat too much.

Even before reading this article, you may have suspected that there is a communication link between your digestive tract and your brain. Have you noticed, for instance, that eating some fatty foods seems to improve your mood? Research suggests that this happens when your ENS sends ‘happy signals’ to your brain, starting a chain reaction that makes you feel better. This may explain why people tend to eat so-called comfort food when feeling stressed. Scientists are exploring the possibility of artificially stimulating the ENS as a treatment for depression.

Another example of communication between the brain and the digestive system is what has been described as having butterflies in one’s stomach. This feeling may be the result of the ENS diverting blood away from the stomach when the brain experiences tension or stress. Nausea can be another result, as during stress the brain triggers the ENS to change the gut’s normal contractions. According to experts, this brain-gut connection might also be the basis for so-called gut instincts.

While the ENS may generate such gut feelings, it cannot think for you or direct your decisions. In other words, the ENS is not really a brain. It cannot help you to compose a song, balance your bank account, or do your homework. Still, this marvelous system continues to amaze scientists for its complexity—much of it perhaps still undiscovered. So the next time you are about to eat a meal, pause and think about all the monitoring, data processing, coordination, and communication that is about to take place in your digestive system!

The Enteric Nervous System (ENS)—Your Body’s “Second Brain”?

Evidence for evolution...or Intelligent Design?
 

Sapiens

Polymathematician
But of course your 'sources' wouldn't be biased at all...would they? :D

Do you believe that amoebas evolved into dinosaurs? Can you prove it?

No design you say?

images
images
images
images
images
images


That is easy to say until you really look at them.....these guys just 'designed' themselves, did they?
If you insist on calling it "design," then the design was the result of two things: over production of offspring with respect to the environment's carrying capacity and differential mortality based on inherited characteristics. You are invoking a stawman.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
If you insist on calling it "design," then the design was the result of two things:
Oh I agree....1) a brilliant Designer and 2) a masterful use of color and contrast. Breathtaking.

Denying that these are designed is like walking into an art gallery and claiming there is no artist. That was just a small sample of the color and patterning in the butterfly/moth world.....there are so many more...all just accidents. :rolleyes:

over production of offspring with respect to the environment's carrying capacity and differential mortality based on inherited characteristics.

Mumbo jumbo. :confused: That's the explanation you accept? I think its a load of unsubstantiated rubbish personally. You can keep it if it makes you feel 'educated'.

Do you believe that amoebas evolved into dinosaurs Sapiens?

You are invoking a stawman.

I have no doubt that you will encounter my 'strawman' at some point in your existence.....let me know how that meeting goes, will you? :D
 

Sapiens

Polymathematician
Why do all your responses to me begin with personal observations about my motives or my character? You have no personal flaws apparently, so you feel justified in attributing evil motives and flaws to a poster rather than just addressing the issues.
Evil motives? Flaws? Yes ... but your primary flaw is a lack of basic knowledge that you willingly acknowledge and brag on.
You speak of rebuttals but I haven't seen anything convincing from you so far.
I will never compromise my religious beliefs because I believe that they are true. Nature speaks about its Designer unless you have your fingers in your ears, w.histling Dixie. Are you any different to me in that respect?
Quite different, we have supporting evidence and you have an argument from ignorance.
Accusing me of being biased when bias is clearly shown by evolutionists for their own beliefs is a little silly, don't you think? Who said bias was a bad thing in its proper place....who said it was to be avoided when kept in proper perspective?
Once again: we have supporting evidence and you have an argument from ignorance; thus our "bias" is based on rationality and yours is based on a demonstrably false fable.
It is ridiculous to think that any source provided by me would ever meet with your approval,
No it is not, however, you have only two sources: the Bible, which contains so much claptrap that it is entirely undependable and logical fallacies, thus nothing you have said to date can be taken seriously.
and no source you provide, or have provided to date, has anything resembling irrefutable evidence for macro-evolution.
Yet, you have failed to refute any of it, depending as you do on logical fallacies.
You guys don't seem to be able to discern the difference between fact and suggestion. A prediction is not a fact just because a scientist interpreted evidence to fit it.
Fact and suggestion? What are you talking about? Prediction? That's easy ... A prediction is a forecast, "Pre" means “before” and “diction” is talking. A prediction is a statement about the future. It is sometimes a guess and sometimes based on facts or evidence. Tiktaalik is a perfect example of prediction based on facts and evidence.
You have a house of cards.....impressive only to yourselves in your own ego driven world, but it lacks any real foundation. The storm that is coming will blow your house down.....but that is just my Bible oriented opinion. Time will tell, won't it? :)
You have no evidence, you're just blowing smoke.
in the meantime, I will examine the evidence for my Creator and others can make up their own minds.
There is no such evidence, all there is is your unsupported bias and belief.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top