|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Debating evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
SR71 Member (Idle past 6244 days) Posts: 38 Joined: |
He wants to know how a species without logic can evolve and gain logic. Here's his exact words:
quote: IMO, we have a logic simply because we have the most developed brains. Am I not right --- is it not that simple!?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
In my subjective experience, I tend to agree, however I would like to know your sources. I don't have any offhand.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
IMO, we have a logic simply because we have the most developed brains. He's not talking about logic, he's talking about reason. It all comes from language. And we know that languages do evolve. You can even teach language to most primates. Nonetheless, the origin of human consciousness is shrouded in mystery. Not the least of which is the mystery of what it actually is. Creationism can't answer that, either; the best they can do is assert that it's something God has to breathe into you. That doesn't really answer the question. At some point you need to reign him in. Creationists like to machinegun question after question. You need to call him on his responsibility to defend his original arguments and rebut your evidence. Otherwise you're not actually having a discussion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Get used to it. When they cannot support their positions they dash away to something else.
As too logic:
Logic is no big deal. It seems to develop among almost all species, dolphin, all the primates including man, many birds, octopi and squid. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: Pretty much. Our larger brains endow us with greater intelligence, which allows us create all sorts of useful, artificial tools, like logic. "Religion is the best business to be in. It's the only one where the customers blame themselves for product failure." -- Ellis Weiner (quoted on the NAiG message board)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
SR71 Member (Idle past 6244 days) Posts: 38 Joined: |
quote: He says the Coriolis affect IS proof that the earth is young because of these reasons. These were his words, and I simply replied with "the last glaciation period...?" Was that correct?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2541 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
how about stating that deserts are formed depending on certain conditions. And that the Sahara was once grassland (is that the right biome?), and some of the prove lies in the ancient riverbed found running through it. Oh, and the Sahara, according to geology (if I'm right it's this field) is much older than 4 thousand years.
Last glacial age is a good response, but qualify it by saying that it ended twelve thousands years ago (roughly) anyone know how fast the glaciers retreat? And what about the uplifting of N. America since their retreat?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
SR71 Member (Idle past 6244 days) Posts: 38 Joined: |
RAZD - all of that was extremely interesting about the moon/earth gravitational field. Thanks!!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2541 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
Since the oldest desert in the world is only 4,000, which you didn't prove false but yet supported, it is rational to conclude that the earth is not billions of years old ask him how this conclusion is rational and logical. basing your date off of one method is ver risky and uncertain. quick answer--it's not. Oh, and deserts do disappear and reform. It often depends on where the continent is and whether there is a nearby mountain range, as well as a lack or rain. How can he explain the fact of emergence and disapperance of deserts with his assumption? ask him that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
SR71 Member (Idle past 6244 days) Posts: 38 Joined: |
Still waiting on HIS next response but I will keep it in mind. Thank you!
What do you people do for careers? Like I said I'm a teenager and if I could be this knowledgable I would definitely choose to.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Like I said I'm a teenager and if I could be this knowledgable I would definitely choose to. If you ask questions from those who know, and seek out books and other information, then you do so choose.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
SR71 Member (Idle past 6244 days) Posts: 38 Joined: |
Good point. But obviously people like RAZD and yourself don't just ask questions and read to understand these subjects so well...?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Just question answers.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2541 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
if you want to understand, you have to reach out and grab the bull by the horns. I myslef am but a teenager, but I have taken every science course offered by my high school except for physics and ecology. I'm taking summer classes at my community college to rebuild my foundation of math.
If you can, take challenging classes that make you think--perfect example would be a philosophy class or a high-level english class (think AP or IB) oh, there is a general reply button and a specific reply button. the GR button is to the left, at the bottom page I think. The SR, which I'm using right now, is located under the post you want to reply to. It helps us understand who you are responding to if you use the SR button.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
DominionSeraph Member (Idle past 4782 days) Posts: 365 From: on High Joined: |
SR71 writes: (3)The population itself is evidence of a young planet. In 1810 the population was 1 billion. within less then 200 years the population grew to 6 billion. This meants that according the rate at which population grows at a certain rate according to poplation size. Through this study the earth can't even be a million years old. If you use E. coli, you can 'prove' that the Earth cannot be more than a few days old.If I remember my math results correctly, it would take something like 45 days for the offspring of 1 bacterium to out-mass the entire visible universe.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024