Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The problem with creationism and god
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5241 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 31 of 109 (535914)
11-18-2009 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Edmund352
11-18-2009 4:41 PM


Re: Easy Target Alert
you tell me how an irreducibly complex system comes into being.
There's no such thing as an irreducibly complex system.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Edmund352, posted 11-18-2009 4:41 PM Edmund352 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by AdminNosy, posted 11-18-2009 5:05 PM Blzebub has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 32 of 109 (535916)
11-18-2009 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Edmund352
11-18-2009 4:41 PM


Re: Easy Target Alert
Hi Edmund352, welcome to EvC,
If you have read the bible you would see that God is a perfect God
I have read the Bible and find this to be untrue. I found god to be vengful, petty, angry and a tyrant ... is my interpretation as valid as yours? If not, why not?
Well sorry mate but thats a well-known fact so you tell me how an irreducibly complex system comes into being.
What Behe said about irreducibly complex structures in nature has been proven wrong. Behe never was able to prove to the scientific community that his hypothesis was correct.
There are a few/many youtube videos that cover the trail he was in in Dover, PA. (USA) where he was allowed to defend his position on the matter, and failed.
Here is a 2hr lecture about the trail, and Behe's argument. I recommend you watch it so you don't make the same mistake of thinking Behe's argument was a fact:
In fact, "facts" are hard to establish in science, as you will soon find out on this site.
As for your time and circumstance, that doesn't help much. I'm saying it took some time before the 'first living creature was made' and after that everything ran smoothly? common face the facts, the probability of that happening is virtually zero
The problem is, we have a fossil record that shows no life on this planet 4 Billion years ago (Bya), and fossils that show there was life 3.5 Bya -
So, common sense would tell you that "something" happened, right?
Now, you can either believe that for some reason, everything leading up to the solar systems, planets, stars, heavy elements, this earth, formed naturally (which many theories explain how) YET, life HAD TO BE formed supernaturally - OR - you can accept that life also formed naturally, like everything else, and investigate, scientifically, how that happened ... which do you feel is more probable?
In any case, something happen between those 2 time frames, this we can all agree on - The question is, what happened?
If everything leading up to the conditions for life was done naturally, and everything after occured naturally, what reason does anyone have to expect life to be supernatural?
- Oni
[ABE] Sorry Nosy, I saw your post after I posted my piece on IC. Either way, I think the video is still a great watch for Edmund.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Edmund352, posted 11-18-2009 4:41 PM Edmund352 has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 33 of 109 (535917)
11-18-2009 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Blzebub
11-18-2009 4:56 PM


Topic
I don't think we should be getting into IC systems here but if someone wants to start another thread that would be fine.
But (for both of you)
There are irreducibly complex systems.
We know how they can evolve.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Blzebub, posted 11-18-2009 4:56 PM Blzebub has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Blzebub, posted 11-18-2009 5:10 PM AdminNosy has not replied
 Message 38 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 9:16 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5241 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 34 of 109 (535920)
11-18-2009 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by AdminNosy
11-18-2009 5:05 PM


Re: Topic
There are irreducibly complex systems.
No there are not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by AdminNosy, posted 11-18-2009 5:05 PM AdminNosy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by greyseal, posted 11-19-2009 3:45 AM Blzebub has not replied

  
lyx2no
Member (Idle past 4717 days)
Posts: 1277
From: A vast, undifferentiated plane.
Joined: 02-28-2008


Message 35 of 109 (535937)
11-18-2009 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Edmund352
11-18-2009 4:41 PM


Re: Easy Target Alert
You're a hit, E352. I go off to make dinner and I come back and have jillions of posts to catch up on.
Teleautobiography: A ghost written autobiography.
I had lots of smarty pants things to say but it looks like the OT kibosh has been sent down.

It's not the man that knows the most that has the most to say.
Anon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Edmund352, posted 11-18-2009 4:41 PM Edmund352 has not replied

  
greyseal
Member (Idle past 3862 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 36 of 109 (535989)
11-19-2009 3:45 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Blzebub
11-18-2009 5:10 PM


irreducibly complex and not simplifiable
There are irreducibly complex systems.
No there are not.
I don't think you're generally supposed to reply to such admin messages, but...I think he meant that there are systems that are irreducibly complex in such a way that, if you were to start "shotgun debugging" or to metaphorically take a pickaxe and start removing pieces, they would fail to work.
That's a different thing from saying there's no way it could be simplified - so as long as he meant the former and not the latter, then he's right

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Blzebub, posted 11-18-2009 5:10 PM Blzebub has not replied

  
BarackZero
Member (Idle past 4854 days)
Posts: 57
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 37 of 109 (585420)
10-08-2010 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by bluescat48
10-18-2009 7:56 AM


Bluescat48: "Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. " - W T Young, 2008
=============
BarackZero:
By what authority this figure of "~90% correct" for "Evolution" is derived and how, nobody has begun to state.
Moreover, if in fact God did create the universe, "Creation" would be 100% correct. There is no degree of correctness. Either we have a Creator or we do not.
But by far the biggest mistake of Darwinists is the pretense that *something* has to be The Theory. If Darwinism goes out the door, *something* has to take its place immediately.
This is nonsense, but it is incessantly prattled by those who deem themselves *scientists.*
It is inherently unscientific. One must reject what simply does not work, irrespective of whether or not a better explanation is extant at that time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by bluescat48, posted 10-18-2009 7:56 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Huntard, posted 10-08-2010 9:31 AM BarackZero has replied
 Message 41 by jar, posted 10-08-2010 9:58 AM BarackZero has not replied
 Message 42 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-08-2010 10:48 AM BarackZero has replied
 Message 56 by bluescat48, posted 10-08-2010 2:43 PM BarackZero has not replied
 Message 58 by Omnivorous, posted 10-08-2010 4:38 PM BarackZero has replied

  
BarackZero
Member (Idle past 4854 days)
Posts: 57
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 38 of 109 (585421)
10-08-2010 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by AdminNosy
11-18-2009 5:05 PM


Re: Topic
AdminNosy:
But (for both of you)
There are irreducibly complex systems.
We know how they can evolve.
==========
BarackZero:
Really?
Please provide the evolutionary biochemical pathway for the development of the human blood clotting mechanism.
Then show the evolutionary diagram from our nearest invertebrate ancestor to Homo sapiens, and label each and every branch by genus and species.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by AdminNosy, posted 11-18-2009 5:05 PM AdminNosy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Huntard, posted 10-08-2010 9:44 AM BarackZero has not replied
 Message 43 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-08-2010 10:53 AM BarackZero has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 39 of 109 (585423)
10-08-2010 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by BarackZero
10-08-2010 9:09 AM


BarackZero writes:
One must reject what simply does not work, irrespective of whether or not a better explanation is extant at that time.
But until a better explanation is available, the current one does work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 9:09 AM BarackZero has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 12:34 PM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 40 of 109 (585427)
10-08-2010 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by BarackZero
10-08-2010 9:16 AM


Re: Topic
BarackZero writes:
Really?
Yes.
Please provide the evolutionary biochemical pathway for the development of the human blood clotting mechanism.
Here's an article on it.
Then show the evolutionary diagram from our nearest invertebrate ancestor to Homo sapiens, and label each and every branch by genus and species.
Yeah, sure, let me show you millions of species. That's not how science works. Show me every second of every minute of every hour of your life from your conecption up until this point or I won't believe you exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 9:16 AM BarackZero has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 41 of 109 (585429)
10-08-2010 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by BarackZero
10-08-2010 9:09 AM


Moreover, if in fact God did create the universe, "Creation" would be 100% correct. There is no degree of correctness. Either we have a Creator or we do not.
Whether there is a creator or not tells us nothing about how the variety of life we see came into being. Speaking as a Christian, it is totally irrelevant to the question of evolution.
Of course there are degrees of correctness, and Biblical Creationism is demonstrably wrong and in fact, simply forcing ignorance on our children.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 9:09 AM BarackZero has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 42 of 109 (585442)
10-08-2010 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by BarackZero
10-08-2010 9:09 AM


By what authority this figure of "~90% correct" for "Evolution" is derived and how, nobody has begun to state.
Satire does not require numerical precision.
Moreover, if in fact God did create the universe, "Creation" would be 100% correct. There is no degree of correctness. Either we have a Creator or we do not.
True. We don't. I'm glad I could clear that up for you.
But by far the biggest mistake of Darwinists is the pretense that *something* has to be The Theory. If Darwinism goes out the door, *something* has to take its place immediately.
This is nonsense, but it is incessantly prattled by those who deem themselves *scientists.*
Incessantly, eh? Then perhaps you could quote one of them?
Only it sounds to me like what you're actually describing is the Great Big False Dichotomy of creationists, whereby arguments against evolution are taken to be arguments for creationism.
The converse is not the case. You never hear a real scientist explaining that since snakes can't talk Darwin must have been right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 9:09 AM BarackZero has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 12:39 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 43 of 109 (585445)
10-08-2010 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by BarackZero
10-08-2010 9:16 AM


Re: Topic
Then show the evolutionary diagram from our nearest invertebrate ancestor to Homo sapiens, and label each and every branch by genus and species.
Show me your family tree from Adam, labeling each individual by name ...
No?
Ah well then, your fiction of having so-called "ancestors" is exploded. Obviously you were poofed out of thin air by magic.
Creationists are funny.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 9:16 AM BarackZero has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 12:35 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
BarackZero
Member (Idle past 4854 days)
Posts: 57
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 44 of 109 (585473)
10-08-2010 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Huntard
10-08-2010 9:31 AM


You may CLAIM that evolution "does work" until Darwin comes home.
That does not make it so.
It "works" because millions of people have their lives and reputations heavily invested in it, and they continue to promote it at the tops of their lungs.
Nobody says "Gravity is as firm a theory as evolution."
Only the reverse pretense is parroted endlessly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Huntard, posted 10-08-2010 9:31 AM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-08-2010 12:39 PM BarackZero has not replied
 Message 49 by Huntard, posted 10-08-2010 12:42 PM BarackZero has not replied

  
BarackZero
Member (Idle past 4854 days)
Posts: 57
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 45 of 109 (585474)
10-08-2010 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Dr Adequate
10-08-2010 10:53 AM


Re: Topic
Darwinists are nauseatingly arrogant and condescending.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-08-2010 10:53 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-08-2010 12:47 PM BarackZero has not replied
 Message 54 by jar, posted 10-08-2010 1:09 PM BarackZero has replied
 Message 57 by dwise1, posted 10-08-2010 3:43 PM BarackZero 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