Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Irrefutable departure
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 1 of 48 (527474)
10-01-2009 1:15 PM


Decided to leave EvC participation for a long old time, if not permanantly.
I enjoyed debating at times. I find I am challenged almost into a position of being neutral.
Obviously I am Christian, heavily Christian, and believe the bible is true, however it happened. I do not rule out an evolution of some sort.
But I think essentially, it comes down to beliefs. One can only assess things based on their own thinking, and what others say. But it seems that both creationists and evolutionists won't agree on even the details so in the end you start to think, "am I going insane".
So yes - it's more attitude/beliefs, than intellect.
Sorry if I don't respond to any posts. Kind regards, irrefutable one.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Taz, posted 10-01-2009 4:16 PM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 17 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-01-2010 3:15 PM mike the wiz has replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


(2)
Message 16 of 48 (545109)
02-01-2010 7:52 AM


Thanks to Parasomnium, and others, for their comments.
I am still friendly with Taz, even if he is not with me. While I welcome kind comments, it's not necessary to say anything bad about Taz, I think he just misunderstands me with the planet-comment. He would not notice me if I lived with him for six months. Even people "close" to me don't realize how MUCH I am Christian, so I fail to see how my distancing would change much, other than the fact that one less friendly albeit none-social person's presence being diminished.
Yes, I am Christian, strongly Christian, but whether I am more or less biblical, this doesn't affect me...as I have and always have been someone that believes in Jesus Christ, fully.
Unfortunately, forums such as these only give us a glimpse of a person. yes - at time I have been too strong in my opinions, and sometimes let the heat override the head, but that heat comes from what you might call passion.
It's a bit cheesy but it's the only word I can find that fits the truth a little.
Not much to say really, I see there is now private messaging and some sort of rating system that suggests that people truly rate my posts as low. That's a shame because I can almost guarantee you that only a few people understand what I am saying.
Parasomnium is one of them, because he almost solved my riddle, which means he must think logically.
Thus far, he is the only one that actually has shown something aswell as saying something. Other types are just here for belidgerent war.
I truly apreciate the former-types that have humility, genuine smartness, and no unkind input.
I have resolved to work HARD on being, "at peace with all men".
P.s. I am not an enemy of atheists.

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-03-2010 7:05 AM mike the wiz has replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


(1)
Message 18 of 48 (545193)
02-02-2010 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Dr Adequate
02-01-2010 3:15 PM


Details
Indeed.
This is why, to an extent, as I said in message 1, it is confusing. Not just for me, but for creationists and evolutionists. As much as both sides want to believe they have the rational-cookie, in my experience, only the complete detachment of bias in one's mind, works in favour of cogent, coherent, workable logic.
This is why, in the past, I have discussed "evidence" so very much, and the ad nauseum, "red-ball theory" example.
It is my attempt to force both sides to see things in a boring, objective way.
For me, there is no ultimate reconciliation. One side has death, the other side has design. Both seem to be facts.
Unless you have a painful immutable truth-seeking trait, you will forego facts, and not be conscious of it.
You have to REMOVE, consciously, all attempts to say something based on your opinion, put it to one side, and assess things with a painful honesty.
This is why I say the best evidence for transitionals, to my mind, is the transitionals of the australopithecines leading to the humans. Why? Because I observe that the least morphological change is conceivable, whereas other "kinds" are less conceivable.
Yes, this doesn't "favour" me and my bible. But my point is; so bloody what!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-01-2010 3:15 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by ZenMonkey, posted 02-02-2010 3:06 PM mike the wiz has replied
 Message 20 by Taq, posted 02-02-2010 3:38 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


(1)
Message 21 of 48 (545325)
02-03-2010 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by ZenMonkey
02-02-2010 3:06 PM


Re: Details
That's not why, but it's interesting, thanks.
What I meant by the least morphological changes, is that I can conceive, from looking at skulls such as Africanus, Habillis etc,... that a progression from ape to human, is plausible/credulous.
I have discussed, at length, in other topics, why it is honest to qualify a transitional, even though it doesn't prove much.
There are still problems, for me - which the press do not expound, such as the difference in the gait between human and apes/monkeys, and the different design of arch in the foot. An ape's legs are more like arms, or atleast, it's as though they have four hands.
The evidence, having read into details about it, doesn't convince me that there is a real, historical transition. I know about nested hierarchies, but I need to learn more about that, as I don't pretend to be a scientist, unlike you people.
(This must be my last post, as this topic is about my departure, which is unrefuted!
Bye.........................AGAIN.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by ZenMonkey, posted 02-02-2010 3:06 PM ZenMonkey has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


(1)
Message 23 of 48 (545328)
02-03-2010 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Hyroglyphx
02-03-2010 6:52 AM


Even if Taz would rather me on a different planet, I wave a banner from Mars, with a request;
"Please don't sin against taz".
I say this, because those comments hurt me, when I read them. I think Taz, he understands his own position, and in his world it makes sense that I have "gotten worse".
I think deep down - Taz needs to know for himself, the real Christ, and focus on what he said and done, and not what Christians fail at doing, so very miserably.
It's okay to call mikey things, with mikey - but I would only request that you do not hurt eachother with words intended to sting the soul. Taz is a person too, a miracle, and I hope he can dispose of bitterness, and offer what he has, which is plenty.
Bye again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-03-2010 6:52 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Stile, posted 02-03-2010 9:06 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


(1)
Message 25 of 48 (545346)
02-03-2010 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Hyroglyphx
02-03-2010 7:05 AM


Thanks for the analysis.
But let's not mince words, mikey holds his ground, keeps his pistoles loaded, and hangs on like a tick on a boar.
This is highly tedious to my "peers". But like Dumbledore, and Duracel , superman's dad, my peers can be wrong.
You see, you have to read my original posts. God has given me wisdom and discerning. Yes - I struggle with pride, because knowledge puffs up. I am trying to deflate the mikey-balloon, but you have to realise that I KNOW the things I say are based on correct wisdom.
Think! If you don't just believe you have something, but you actually know it, but nobody else acknowledges, do you just fold to their will?
I like what Ayrton Senna said - that you shouldn't allow people to mould you into what they want you to be. You have to be yourself, (paraphrase).
It's not assuredness, it's that a deduction is the same as getting a maths problem correct, only we are using language, that foggy problem!
If you calculate 5 x 5 and KNOW it's 25 do you doubt yourself, because people can't see it?
Now, I am not always correct, this I conceded, but I can tell you whether I am correct certainly, when I am.
Here is my blog, I'd rather people didn't comment, it's just a basic overview of the issue, read from the bottom. Blog not found

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-03-2010 7:05 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Nuggin, posted 02-03-2010 11:00 AM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 39 by Taq, posted 02-03-2010 3:43 PM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 40 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-03-2010 7:42 PM mike the wiz has replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


(1)
Message 44 of 48 (545545)
02-04-2010 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Hyroglyphx
02-03-2010 7:42 PM


Now this post is a 5!(Your post I am responding to, not my one)
You yourself have just shown wisdom, by not jumping to any of the conclusions the other people did. (I don't include Iano, I am grateful for his comments, and think he done a good job in his posts, of explaining things better than I can.)
When I said, "deduction", I didn't mean, "believe and accept Jesus in your heart". Infact, it was nothing to do with being Christian, or Christ.
I know that you also know this.
What I mean is logical deduction.
Here is an example;
God kills somebody for sin. Therefore, God has done evil, therefore God is evil.
Now this is an example of a claim. Now within that claim is a whole host of assumptions, and potentially, fallacies.
Now here's the deduction, which is as simple as 5 x 5;
If you do, "evil", it does not FOLLOW, logically, that you are evil.
For example, there are two people, both of them have something evil happen to them. They are both victims of the electric chair.
An evil thing has come upon them both, CERTAINLY. There is no escaping it. However, one person was being executed legally, and the other person was the victim of a serial killer.
The EFFECTS are the same; evil has come upon them both, but the serial killer is evil, and the legal executioner is not evil.
This is all I meant by, "deduction".
Now, Hyroglyphx, this is how I approach EVERY SUBJECT.
I am certain, as much as I can be, that this is perfectly sound deduction, whether "God" is involved or not.
example;
We know that the new government are responsible for tax rates because they are higher than ever, and they have been in power for four years!
This is begging the question, because it doesn't establish that the tax rates were NOT inherited from a previous government, that were actually responsible.
You see, I KNOW, Hyroglyphx, that I am rational, and that my arguments are based on genuine deduction, and TRUST ME - they hate me for it. Look at my rate-scores.
My friend, people will hate you for being wrong, but they will absolutely detest you and even kill you for being RIGHT, against their beliefs.
I claim a wisdom - it doesn't make me the smartest ever, and I have to deal with pride, but the Holy Spirit will help me with that as He has with other sin-problems in my life.
This truly is my final post, I only responded, because you have acted completely honestly, and rationally, and didn't opportunistically jump all over me..
Bye for now. All the best.
EDIT, some more things I have said.
mike the wiz writes:
I condemn rape. (snip)
But Jack the Ripper doesn't. He said that according to his relative morals, I should rape. I told him I don't want to rape therefore he concluded I was immoral.
--
The problem with the natural assumption is that it is the very same thing as the God of the gaps fallacy. That is - it is also fallacious. Think with me for a moment.
Science is great when it comes to analyzing natural processes, repeatable experiment, and so forth. But when it comes to evolution, whether chemical or biological, you MUST include assumptions about questions pertaining to God. Such theories depend on a designer not being involved.
If you say that you can't include God in science - I agree. If you say you can continue to assess "truth" about nature - without God, I don't agree, because logically, you can now only come to a false conclusion, based on premisses which do not involve a Creator.
--
Since bacteria are asexual, reproduce much much faster than humans, then a fossil of 1 billion years would represent the equivalent of a human fossil which is what? 100 billion years old?
The silly examples of flagellum apparently "evolving" certainly seem to not to be impressive, when put next to such a living fossil.
--
But ofcourse - just keep on stating ad nauseum, that there is no evidence for creation whatsoever. This doesn't make you scientific - it makes you dogmatic, because even a very weak theory has evidence.
--
To understand why we (Christian Creationists), reject evolution, the big bang theory, and chemical evolution is because when man attempts to find "truth" and ignores the bible, then if you believe in an inerrant bible, as we do, then logically it follows that certain theories will be mutually exclusive to that belief.
Therefore in response to special pleading, we have to show that there is a reason for our rejection, which is exclusive, which then removes the accusation of a double standard.
What is important is that we don't reject any facts. for example, I do not reject effects of gravity, but more precisely, I do not reject anything which exists in God's universe,
An acceptance of oxygen will not negate an inerrant bible. But evolution clearly is a theory which makes it follow that an inerrant bible must certainly be false.
Therefore, even though Darwin doesn't specifically state that we can not have bible belief, nor any evolutionary scientist, infact, logically one must reject that very thing.
This means that it now becomes a question of priorities. Does a person who believes in the God of the bible, and puts his whole life there for God to take, reject the God that he knows has done so much for him/her?
--
Thou foolish creationist, uneducated, with no pride that swelleth the head, verily I will treat thee with respect if you sacrifice a bull to my omniscience at Lake Darwin. And if thou pretendeth to have the useage of thine brain for even a moment, in the delusion that you can actually think like me, then I will smite thee asunder and leave thee in the road-side, as yet another foolish, teenage, under-educated twurp that you are. So be good little fool, as your arguments have been blown apart since the beginning of time, even though I don't even know what you know, or how you think.
Here is my blog, which is much less contentious, and it's only short "bursts" of writing. Blog not found
Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.
Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-03-2010 7:42 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Buzsaw, posted 02-04-2010 12:58 PM mike the wiz has replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 47 of 48 (545746)
02-05-2010 6:48 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Buzsaw
02-04-2010 12:58 PM


Re: Goodby, Mike
Thankyou so much for that kind message Buz. I was going to lurk but I just have to respond to your message.
I have been glad that over the years, you have stuck your guns, and I know that your faith is genuine, and that like me, you are an individualist, irrefutable in Christ. Showing and proving that God is more powerful than those of the world, that try and kill your faith unsuccessfully.
God bless you and all of your babas... I will pop in from time to time, to lurk, and I will be seeing you in a new heavens and a new earth! Never give up on Christ, your work here has also meant a lot to so many!
Take care, and look out for my boring blog-updates, baba-cyber-bud.
Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Buzsaw, posted 02-04-2010 12:58 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Buzsaw, posted 02-05-2010 9:02 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024