Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9176 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,655 Year: 4,912/9,624 Month: 260/427 Week: 6/64 Day: 2/2 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How Darwin caused atheism
subbie
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 91 of 122 (601751)
01-23-2011 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by petrophysics1
01-23-2011 8:41 PM


Re: You What?
WTF? Are you on the rag or something?

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 8:41 PM petrophysics1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 10:08 PM subbie has replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 122 (601754)
01-23-2011 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by jar
01-23-2011 8:48 PM


Re: You What?
I'm sorry but what the hell do your really silly questions have to do with any god, God or GOD?
Spoken like a true theist who doesn't have a clue.
Can you answer my three questions.
The answer to that is no.
So why can't you say that?
So you don't know shit, about yourself or God, learn to live with it OR LOOK.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by jar, posted 01-23-2011 8:48 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by jar, posted 01-23-2011 10:03 PM petrophysics1 has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34065
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 93 of 122 (601755)
01-23-2011 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by petrophysics1
01-23-2011 9:55 PM


Re: You What?
I can certainly answer the first one, have written many stories about those times. The second question is just plain stupid, word salad, meaningless. The third is also as stupid. There is no such point.
And again I must ask, what the hell do your really silly questions have to do with any god, God or GOD?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 9:55 PM petrophysics1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 10:37 PM jar has replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 94 of 122 (601756)
01-23-2011 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by subbie
01-23-2011 9:45 PM


Re: You What?
No,
I just know something you don't.
Would you like me to go through a list of all the things I know how to do that you don't.
Answer my three questions or what we know is your don't know shit about yourself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by subbie, posted 01-23-2011 9:45 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by subbie, posted 01-23-2011 10:23 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 95 of 122 (601759)
01-23-2011 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by petrophysics1
01-23-2011 10:08 PM


Re: You What?
The way you're going on, it really sounds like someone not only peed in your Wheaties, but they took a dump as well. Dude, chill out. If you have something rational to say, it's a lot more likely to be taken seriously if you sound rational. I kinda doubt you have anything rational to say, but try to calm down and give it another shot. Who knows, I've been wrong before.
{AbE} I have no doubt that you know things I don't. I'm equally certain I know things you don't. We could compare lists, but that seems silly.
I do strongly suspect that you are wrong about a lot more things than I am, but I'm not interested enough in the question to actually inquire.
Edited by subbie, : As noted

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 10:08 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by jar, posted 01-23-2011 10:51 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 96 of 122 (601760)
01-23-2011 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by jar
01-23-2011 10:03 PM


Re: You What?
Jar,
So you can't answer my three questions. What a surprise.
You were at your birth, were you not?
So tell me about it.
Now becoming a sentient being is a bill deal for me, so why don't you tell me when that happened to you.
I'll bet in your earliest memory you are already a sentient being, when did that happen?
Never thought about it did you.
You are a theist/atheist who has never thought about the contents of his own mind and looked at it. Your mind, is as you know, part of the physical universe. You need to look at it.
You have not, fix that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by jar, posted 01-23-2011 10:03 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by jar, posted 01-23-2011 10:39 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34065
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 97 of 122 (601761)
01-23-2011 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by petrophysics1
01-23-2011 10:37 PM


Re: You What?
And again I must ask, what the hell do your really silly questions have to do with any god, God or GOD?
Even more, what the hell does your nonsense have to do with the topic?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 10:37 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34065
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 98 of 122 (601762)
01-23-2011 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by subbie
01-23-2011 10:23 PM


Re: You What?
What is so funny about petro's crap is it implies that my knowledge of myself actually has something to do with the reality of GOD. It's like he worships poor little Tinker and unless we squeeze our eyes really tight and repeat "I do believe in fairies, I do believe in fairies" the god he tries to market will have it's greem glow fade away.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by subbie, posted 01-23-2011 10:23 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 373 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 99 of 122 (601763)
01-23-2011 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by petrophysics1
01-23-2011 8:41 PM


Re: You What?
Only if you can't answer the three questions I asked.
Which you didn't do. In fact they never even occured to you.
It took me 17 years to be able to remember being born, you never even thought about it.
Answer the three questions I asked or shut up.
If you can answer them you are close to understanding that God exists.
If you can't and don't look you are a person who doesn't know shit about themselves or God.
So stop posting like you know something.
As a matter of fact, I posted as though I didn't know something, namely what your point is.
I still don't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 8:41 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by jar, posted 01-23-2011 10:59 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34065
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 100 of 122 (601764)
01-23-2011 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Dr Adequate
01-23-2011 10:52 PM


Re: You What?
I get the feeling it always past 5:00 where he is.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-23-2011 10:52 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 101 of 122 (601799)
01-24-2011 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by petrophysics1
01-23-2011 3:35 PM


Olof Palme r skjuten.
Hi, Petrophysics.
petrophysics1 writes:
Have you looked everywhere in the physical universe for evidence of God's existance?
No, I'm pretty sure I haven't. But, the methodology of withholding my decision on a matter until I have gathered all information the universe holds on the subject has not been particularly effective for me in the past, so I'm skeptical as to its usefulness in this case.
-----
petrophysics1 writes:
If you have you will be able to answer the following questions, if you can't you don't know shit about yourself or God.
1.) Tell me 40 things that happened to you before the age of 4 and how they affected your thinking or health.
2.) Tell me what it was like to be born.
3.) Tell me when/how you became a sentient being.
I'm perfectly willing to admit my own idiocy and ignorance of a lot of things. If you know those three things about yourself, then I suppose you have that on me and there's not much I can do about it.
In the meantime, I still find my mediocre self in the uncomfortable position of needing to learn things about the universe, and only being able to work with the very few things that I do know in order to do it.
Since all you've given me here is another way to show me that this is the position I'm in, I'm sure you'll understand when I dismiss your contributions as "redundant to what the universe has already provided me," and settle back in to the only course of action that appears to have ever helped me improve my situation.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 3:35 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 102 of 122 (601825)
01-24-2011 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Blue Jay
01-22-2011 6:37 PM


Re: good for the goose
Surely the first replicator also had to emerge from a series of random chemical changes that were selected for at each step by a fitness filter of some kind.
As soon as you have an imperfect replicator that is changing randomly and is passing through a fitness filter you have an evolving replicator that is described through Darwinian mechanisms. Abiogenesis would describe the chemistry of how that first replicator came about which was then subject to Darwinian mechanisms.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Blue Jay, posted 01-22-2011 6:37 PM Blue Jay has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by Blue Jay, posted 01-24-2011 5:13 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 103 of 122 (601826)
01-24-2011 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by petrophysics1
01-23-2011 3:35 PM


Re: good for the goose
If you have you will be able to answer the following questions, if you can't you don't know shit about yourself or God.
1.) Tell me 40 things that happened to you before the age of 4 and how they affected your thinking or health.
2.) Tell me what it was like to be born.
3.) Tell me when/how you became a sentient being.
What does the development of the human brain after birth have to do with the topic?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by petrophysics1, posted 01-23-2011 3:35 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2786 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 104 of 122 (601844)
01-24-2011 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Taq
01-24-2011 2:05 PM


Re: good for the goose
Hi, Taq.
Taq writes:
As soon as you have an imperfect replicator that is changing randomly and is passing through a fitness filter you have an evolving replicator that is described through Darwinian mechanisms. Abiogenesis would describe the chemistry of how that first replicator came about which was then subject to Darwinian mechanisms.
Agreed.
But, I'm having trouble visualizing how the process of development from basic molecules to the first replicator could have taken a path that didn't involve mutations and selection.
Surely that first replicator descended from a system of molecules that had been changing slowly over time and passing through a selective filter, conceptually similar to evolution, right?
The only other option seems to be that the first replicator just appeared out of the blue, in one step.
I mean, I agree that the details of the chemistry would have to be different in a lot of ways (e.g. no true replication and no "genetics" as such before the first replicator), but the ToE isn't really a theory about the chemistry anyway.
Do you (or anyone else) think there's a good-length discussion here? I might be interested in a thread about how abiogenesis differs from evolution.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Taq, posted 01-24-2011 2:05 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Taq, posted 01-24-2011 5:38 PM Blue Jay has not replied
 Message 106 by Briterican, posted 01-24-2011 6:22 PM Blue Jay has not replied
 Message 107 by AZPaul3, posted 01-24-2011 6:28 PM Blue Jay has not replied
 Message 109 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-25-2011 5:16 AM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 105 of 122 (601847)
01-24-2011 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Blue Jay
01-24-2011 5:13 PM


Re: good for the goose
But, I'm having trouble visualizing how the process of development from basic molecules to the first replicator could have taken a path that didn't involve mutations and selection.
The same way all other non-replicating molecules are formed.
Surely that first replicator descended from a system of molecules that had been changing slowly over time and passing through a selective filter, conceptually similar to evolution, right?
Not at all. Nothing had passed through the filter, so there were no descendants. All had "failed" up until that first replicator, the first replicator that had descendants.
The only other option seems to be that the first replicator just appeared out of the blue, in one step.
There could have been many steps as there is with many chemical reactions outside of life. However, none of these steps included Darwinian mechanisms.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Blue Jay, posted 01-24-2011 5:13 PM Blue Jay 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