Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,136 Year: 5,393/9,624 Month: 418/323 Week: 58/204 Day: 34/24 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationists think Evolutionists think like Creationists.
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 17 of 485 (568491)
07-06-2010 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Big_Al35
07-06-2010 9:31 AM


Big_Al35 writes:
Evolutionary thinking however is very pessimistic. They believe in survival of the fittest, kill or be killed, anything goes.
I don't. And I'm an evolutionist. In fact, I don't know any evolutionist who does.
You can see that evolution paints a horrific picture even if it is factually correct. (I am not saying that it is mind) It needs to work on its salesmanship.
It's not the picture evolution paints however. Only creationists ever say it does.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Big_Al35, posted 07-06-2010 9:31 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by tomato, posted 07-06-2010 11:25 AM Huntard has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 45 of 485 (568603)
07-07-2010 5:23 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Big_Al35
07-07-2010 5:04 AM


Big_Al35 writes:
I don't mean to be rude but you are typical of how evolutionists think. "let's see some documentation". Other typical quotes from evolutionists include "where's the evidence", "prove it", "show me one person who" etc etc....
And what exactly is so terrible about those questions?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 5:04 AM Big_Al35 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 5:38 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 47 of 485 (568606)
07-07-2010 5:47 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Big_Al35
07-07-2010 5:38 AM


Big_Al35 writes:
If there is nothing wrong with these questions then I guess you wont mind me asking for a source for the following quote.
tomato writes:
We are told that God is infinite in love.
Of course I don't, the source for that quote is Message 41 by tomato. If you want to know where he got it, I suggest asking him. Though I suspect it's from some Christian website or another.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 5:38 AM Big_Al35 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 6:05 AM Huntard has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 50 of 485 (568611)
07-07-2010 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Big_Al35
07-07-2010 6:33 AM


Big_Al35 writes:
Secondly, you appear to be indicating that evolutionists are bad people in your second sentence.
No Big_Al35, he did not. That was a response to people like you who think that evolutionists are evil people. Please for the love of your god, do something about this reading comprehension problem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 6:33 AM Big_Al35 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 7:22 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 53 of 485 (568617)
07-07-2010 7:30 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Big_Al35
07-07-2010 7:22 AM


Big_Al35 writes:
This one post here confirms the whole premise of the OP if you interchange the terms evolutionist and creationist. It is even a good example of Poe's Law in action. You are becoming a parody of yourself.
Do you enjoy plagiarizing people? I guess that's all that's left if you can't think of a valid response yourself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 7:22 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 58 of 485 (568628)
07-07-2010 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by tomato
07-07-2010 9:24 AM


tomato writes:
MAJOR PREMISE: If the Creationist's statement is true, then Obama will send all the White people to the gas chambers.
MINOR PREMISE: Obama will not send all the White people to the gas chambers.
CONCLUSION: Therefore, the Creationist's statement is true.
Would the conclusion here not be that the creationist's statement is false? Am I missing something here?
****Hello, Huntard!****
Thanks.
No problem mate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by tomato, posted 07-07-2010 9:24 AM tomato has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 181 of 485 (570365)
07-27-2010 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 179 by Bolder-dash
07-27-2010 8:30 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
Bolder-dash writes:
See, so you are saying science doesn't allow this. Even if all of the evidence was pointing exactly to that conclusion.
Even if evidence points to that it's of absolutely no use, since pointing to that would make anything possible.
That is why it is false to say that science only goes where the evidence points. Because sometimes the evidence points to the super-natural.
No it doesn't, and it never has.
So if you are saying the scientific community has made a conscience effort to not allow this, because it is not practical for their desired result, they are not really conducting science.
I don't it's so much of a conscious effort, as a practical outcome. If evidence points to a supernatural cause, then any and all possibilities are equally valid. Since that's of absolutely no use to anyone, it can't help science along, even if it were the case.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-27-2010 8:30 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 182 of 485 (570367)
07-27-2010 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 180 by Bolder-dash
07-27-2010 8:43 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
Bolder-dash writes:
Take for example a study of near-death experiences.
No study ever conducted pointed to "the supernatural" as an explanation.
Or experiments of psychic powers.
Showed they didn't eixst.
Or if an experiment proved that a new type of cell appeared from nothing, instantly.
Never happened either. And why would this have a supernatural cause? Do you know everything? Could it not possibly be a naturalistic cause? How do you know?
You can't just throw a blanket over everything that is possible and say-nope, we can't allow non-materialism-instead if that's what it looks like we must either deny it or bury our heads in the sand.
Well, since it has never looked like that, luckily, we don't have to do that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-27-2010 8:43 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 218 of 485 (570634)
07-28-2010 3:20 AM
Reply to: Message 215 by Bolder-dash
07-28-2010 2:56 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
Bolder-dash writes:
Which is it, A. or B.
For me? A.
I'd also like to raise the question Crash asks here, in fact, I asked you about that before. How do you know that this is not the result of a natural cause? Do you know everything?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-28-2010 2:56 AM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-28-2010 4:14 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 223 of 485 (570648)
07-28-2010 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by Bolder-dash
07-28-2010 4:14 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
The problem is, we have as of yet no way to reliabley determine whether or not something is immaterial, or if it originates from the immaterium. As long as no reliable predictions or measurements can be made, how can we ever hope to say something with even the least bit of certainty about it? I mean I can say I'm very confident that evolution happened and is still happening, I can say I'm pretty sure that general relativity is accurate, I can say that bigfoot probably doesn't exist, and I can say that there's probably no way I can fly without aide.
Now, what can we reliably say about the immaterium? I can't think of anything. Does this not render the immaterium as explanation completely useless?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-28-2010 4:14 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 225 of 485 (570650)
07-28-2010 4:51 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by Bolder-dash
07-28-2010 4:42 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
Bolder-dash writes:
Where does thought come from
My brain?
What's the DNA mutation that created thought? Can you find that mutation?
That's probably not one mutation, and that's not how mutations work. There's not one mutation or gene that when switched off prevents you from thinking. It has more to do with brain size/complexity.
No "non-material" claim has ever withstood scrutiny? Haha. That has withstood scrutiny for at least 5000 years, for as long as man has been able to think.
That's alot longer than 5000 years. And we now know it has to do with brain size/complexity.
It withstands scrutiny by virtue of the fact that in all of our years studying it, we still have no explanation for it.
We do, it's because our brains are big and complex enough to think.
Somewhere along the way, someone told you that no supernatural cause has ever stood the test of time-and you just believed it because you couldn't be bothered to actually think about it.
I have thought about it. I have yet to see any evidence, that's why I told you the answer was A. Do you have any evidence for me to take into account?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-28-2010 4:42 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 239 of 485 (570705)
07-28-2010 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 235 by Bolder-dash
07-28-2010 11:19 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
Bolder-dash writes:
But your "buying it" is irrelevant, because you haven't read the data.
We can't read anything if you don't provide it.
There are studies that show that if you tell the participants that it works, before you do the study, the results will be more positive.
Ok. Please produce them then.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-28-2010 11:19 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 267 of 485 (570856)
07-29-2010 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 266 by Bolder-dash
07-29-2010 7:53 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
Bolder-dash writes:
First you are trying to say that any studies of the super-natural have been proven wrong (as if you really know about every study ever done on psychic behavior-which clearly you don't)
Would you mind providing these studies then?
but then you go on to say that it is useless to even find out about super-natural phenomenon because once we discover this, we can not know the cause so its a useless endeavor. It would be useless to find out the truth, if that is what it was?
If the truth is "supernatural" then yes, that's useless.
What law says that because we don't know a cause, we can make up any at all?
No law. However, simple logic tells you that if something is supernatural, anything goes.
We can look for a super-natural cause or we can't?
I think we can potentially look for it, I have no idea how, though. It's you who asserts we can.
We can make up any explanation for the unknown or we can't?
If we want a supernatural explanation we can, if we don't we can't.
You are asking for examples of thought experiments that show evidence of non--materialism,
No he isn't.
but you are already saying they have all been proven wrong.
He's saying that so far as he's aware (ok, he didn't really say it like that, but I think that's what he meant), all studies into the "supernatural" have been shown to be wrong, or have shown that there is no such thing as the "supernatural".
Studying intelligent design means to stop asking questions about how the origins of life, and yet the validity of the ToE to explain the origins of life is unquestionable.
The ToE does not, nor has it ever, explained the origins of life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 7:53 AM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 8:50 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 269 of 485 (570859)
07-29-2010 8:56 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by Bolder-dash
07-29-2010 8:50 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
You do realize no "evolutionist" thinks that it does, don't you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 8:50 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2404 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 320 of 485 (571284)
07-31-2010 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 318 by Bolder-dash
07-31-2010 6:56 AM


Re: How evolutionists think...
Bolder-dash writes:
How does a fossil tell you anything about the processes that brought it into being?
Well, like any natural occurrence, fossilization leaves evidence, this evidence we can study. Scientists have done this, and so now know how fossils are formed.
What is repeatable about studying a fossil?
Everything, as long as you have access to the same fossil.
You have asked me how to study the super-natural and I have answered-if people who are flatlined (dead) at the time a conversation about them is taking place, and they are able to recall that conversation-that is not evidence?
No, for how do you know that is not a natural occurrence. Further, this is not a method of studying the supernatural. We asked you for a method to study the supernatural.
Then what evidence does science have that people like sex-because they say so? Or that people who want to kill themselves are depressed? Or that some people are psychotic?
I'm guessing the people that say they like sex/are depressed/are psychotic.
Have you ever watched Ghost Lab? They do study paranormal activity with cameras, with sound equipment, with electrical activity instruments.
Is that "scientific" enough?
Yes. And what have they ever found? Yep, nothing.
I think the point is that you seem prepared to already decide that it is not possible to ever study any super-natural activity, so because of your preset notion-nothing is going to be satisfactory to you-even though you are perfectly happy to accept all kinds of speculation, and conjectural evidence for the ToE.
Of course, we do no such thing. I wouldn't know a method of studying the supernatural, I have never been into contact with it. If you do have a method of studying the supernatural, please share it with us. Until that time, we really have no way to decide whether something is supernatural or not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-31-2010 6:56 AM Bolder-dash 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