Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Equating science with faith
lyx2no
Member (Idle past 4716 days)
Posts: 1277
From: A vast, undifferentiated plane.
Joined: 02-28-2008


Message 121 of 326 (461125)
03-22-2008 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Beretta
03-22-2008 11:44 AM


Re: Exxonmobile (three cheers)
I was sitting at a bus stop the other day with my eyes closed, half asleep. I opened my eyes to the sudden appearance of a bus. And then it just sat there. It wasn’t a bus I was waiting for so I closed my eyes again. I’m guessing there was a gigantic, world wide flood ” which left no evidence of its occasion save for some small amount of sand in the culvert ” because when I opened my eyes again the bus had gone extinct.
I suppose there might be other theories but to believe any of them I would have to pay attention.
Could you please trot out some kind of thesis here so that this doesn’t have to be done in dribs and drabs? It’s not that I’m opposed to one liners: Use ”em all the time. But it would be nice to know how everything relates in the larger context of “ . therefore faith.”

Kindly
******
Often critical for its own sake.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Beretta, posted 03-22-2008 11:44 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 4:35 AM lyx2no has replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 122 of 326 (461126)
03-22-2008 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Beretta
03-22-2008 11:44 AM


Re: Exxonmobile (three cheers)
Hey Beretta, good to see you again. I'd like to see your input in this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Beretta, posted 03-22-2008 11:44 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 4:32 AM Taz has not replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 123 of 326 (461136)
03-22-2008 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Cold Foreign Object
03-21-2008 8:08 PM


Re: Correction: equating Darwinian "science" with blind faith
I would like you to back up the statement that 'materialism presupposes atheism'.
That sounds like an unsupported aspersion to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-21-2008 8:08 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 4:29 AM ramoss has not replied

obvious Child
Member (Idle past 4116 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 124 of 326 (461156)
03-22-2008 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Beretta
03-22-2008 9:47 AM


Re: Exxonmobile
quote:
How exactly does Exxon mobile depend on the evolution timescale for its drilling? The dates that the evolutionary timescale uses are based on assumptions of age. They may drill in specific areas but they don't need dates to do that, they just need to recognize patterns.
I'm not quite sure what you are getting at, if it's anything. XOM looks at the evolutionary time line to see when specific types of organisms lived and where they lived. Then they drill specifically in those areas and to the depths based on the time line evolution and sediment accumulation rates. They do need the dates as the dates give basic outlines for the depth areas.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Beretta, posted 03-22-2008 9:47 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 4:45 AM obvious Child has replied

obvious Child
Member (Idle past 4116 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 125 of 326 (461157)
03-22-2008 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Beretta
03-22-2008 10:00 AM


Re: Change in allele frequencies over time
As it has already been pointed out, you are using a fallacious strawman, creating your brand of evolution to dishonestly attack actually is. As your post doesn't actually address what evolution is, and is a classic example of creationists dishonestly, I don't see why I should bother to address your first post.
What's your take on the Miller experiment?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Beretta, posted 03-22-2008 10:00 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 5:04 AM obvious Child has replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5598 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 126 of 326 (461168)
03-23-2008 1:55 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by lyx2no
03-22-2008 10:23 AM


Re: Change in allele frequencies over time
The official brand of Evolution™ makes no claims about how life originated whatsoever.
Well that doesn't prevent it from being pretty obvious what they think - with all this random chance going around, God is still out of the equation. What do you imagine they say about how life originated? You can't just have a big theory with no starting point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by lyx2no, posted 03-22-2008 10:23 AM lyx2no has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by DrJones*, posted 03-23-2008 2:25 AM Beretta has replied
 Message 139 by lyx2no, posted 03-23-2008 12:10 PM Beretta has not replied
 Message 143 by Chiroptera, posted 03-23-2008 7:45 PM Beretta has replied
 Message 144 by obvious Child, posted 03-23-2008 7:47 PM Beretta has not replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 127 of 326 (461171)
03-23-2008 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Beretta
03-23-2008 1:55 AM


Re: Change in allele frequencies over time
You can't just have a big theory with no starting point.
And we don't. The starting point for the ToE is the first inperfect reproduction.

soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 1:55 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 5:10 AM DrJones* has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5598 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 128 of 326 (461176)
03-23-2008 3:24 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by Percy
03-22-2008 11:40 AM


Re: Change in allele frequencies over time
claims such as those found in the Bible that are based upon faith rather than evidence will inevitably clash with reality
Well Percy,
At least we agree that faith should not clash with reality -so this is actually a case of getting the log out of your own eye before you criticize my stick.
Clashes are unavoidable when the philosophy of evolutionists (materialism)imagines that life progressed by a process of gradualism and then refuses to alter their imaginative musings despite the Cambrian explosion that clearly defies gradualism in the unbiased mind.Oh that's right, all the billions of intermediate links are missing -we can't expect everything to be preserved can we? But such a BIG glaring gap.....????? That enormous jump from single celled organisms to such incredible diversity...
Well -it doesn't matter, we still know that mutation and natural selection did all this creating so look at the rest of the 'fossil record' and what do we see....'general stasis'-crabs are crabs are crabs and they look pretty much the same today......but that doesn't matter, the committed evolutionist has an answer for everything because we KNOW God didn't do it so random mutation and natural selection must be responsible. It must just be that crabs were well suited to their environment and didn't experience the adaptive pressures that other creatures did. Of course, that's it - so while the crabs reamined happy and content in their environment, other single-celled organisms were so disatisfied over such a long period of time that they just kept changing until they became ...humans with a brain to work it all out, no less.
If faith is to be converted to righteousness, evolutionists deserve the grand prize in the hereafter that doesn't exist (according to them).
Actually, the evidence of simpler and more primitive life with each preceding epoch back in time tells us that at some point life was so simple that it was just chemistry.
Only problem is ...does the geologic column signify time? There again, the evidence........what about the lack of erosion between hundreds of millions of years of 'time', the fossils that go through multiple layers of 'time' without decaying, the bending through millions of years of time that seems to have occurred when the sediment was soft and bendable. But no problem, the evolutionist has answers for all of these pressing questions because their paradigm is ultimate and everything will fit whether it does or not.
That's a BIG log you got there Percy!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Percy, posted 03-22-2008 11:40 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Dr Jack, posted 03-23-2008 5:52 AM Beretta has not replied
 Message 137 by Percy, posted 03-23-2008 10:24 AM Beretta has replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5598 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 129 of 326 (461177)
03-23-2008 4:29 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by ramoss
03-22-2008 5:30 PM


Re: Correction: equating Darwinian "science" with blind faith
'materialism presupposes atheism'.
Matter is all there is....There is no God....matter and natural law is all we have to work with....there is no God.....that is atheism.
As for theistic evolutionists - they are what Lenin called "useful idiots" for the evolutionists -they don't appear to see the contradiction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by ramoss, posted 03-22-2008 5:30 PM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by obvious Child, posted 03-23-2008 8:07 PM Beretta has not replied
 Message 153 by bluegenes, posted 03-24-2008 7:37 AM Beretta has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5598 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 130 of 326 (461178)
03-23-2008 4:32 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by Taz
03-22-2008 2:29 PM


Re: Exxonmobile (three cheers)
Hey True Believer - good to see you too!It's rare to find a friendly face in this neck of the woods.Will get over there asap.
Beretta

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Taz, posted 03-22-2008 2:29 PM Taz has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5598 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 131 of 326 (461179)
03-23-2008 4:35 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by lyx2no
03-22-2008 1:57 PM


Re: Exxonmobile (three cheers)
Could you please trot out some kind of thesis here so that this doesn’t have to be done in dribs and drabs?
You really don't want that -i'll never stop -let's be more specific -what are you looking for...
As for the bus story...what?....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by lyx2no, posted 03-22-2008 1:57 PM lyx2no has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by lyx2no, posted 03-23-2008 12:23 PM Beretta has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5598 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 132 of 326 (461180)
03-23-2008 4:45 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by obvious Child
03-22-2008 9:44 PM


Re: Exxonmobile
XOM looks at the evolutionary time line to see when specific types of organisms lived and where they lived.
Well that would be patterns they look at. Large chunks of the mythological geological column are missing all over the planet -it's not quite how it appears in the text book but yes it is a general guide to sedimentation -where it can be found is one thing (pattern of sedimentation)and that would be helpful but the 'when' of it is irrelevant since that is all based on uniformatarian presuppositions in any case.
They do need the dates as the dates give basic outlines for the depth areas.
That will be the circular reasoning thing -the rocks date the fossils and the fossils date the rocks -you don't need time to follow that -you could call it alpha, beta etc. instead of 100 million, 200 million -it would be a lot more realistic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by obvious Child, posted 03-22-2008 9:44 PM obvious Child has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by obvious Child, posted 03-23-2008 7:36 PM Beretta has replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5598 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 133 of 326 (461181)
03-23-2008 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by obvious Child
03-22-2008 9:47 PM


Miller Experiment
What's your take on the Miller experiment?
It doesn't work when you use more realistic atmospheric gases to start with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by obvious Child, posted 03-22-2008 9:47 PM obvious Child has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by obvious Child, posted 03-23-2008 7:37 PM Beretta has replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5598 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 134 of 326 (461182)
03-23-2008 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 127 by DrJones*
03-23-2008 2:25 AM


The first imperfect reproduction
The starting point for the ToE is the first inperfect reproduction.
But how did you get the reproducible thing together in the first place -from chemicals to reproducible thing is a bi.....g jump.
If you're going to suppose this first reproducible thing, why not go the whole hog and suppose what came before. Evolutionists are not usually so reticent....this is the alternate creation story after all, you have to start at the beginning.
Edited by Beretta, : Spelling!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by DrJones*, posted 03-23-2008 2:25 AM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Dr Jack, posted 03-23-2008 5:56 AM Beretta has replied
 Message 138 by Admin, posted 03-23-2008 10:31 AM Beretta has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 135 of 326 (461187)
03-23-2008 5:52 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by Beretta
03-23-2008 3:24 AM


Re: Change in allele frequencies over time
Clashes are unavoidable when the philosophy of evolutionists (materialism)imagines that life progressed by a process of gradualism and then refuses to alter their imaginative musings despite the Cambrian explosion that clearly defies gradualism in the unbiased mind.Oh that's right, all the billions of intermediate links are missing -we can't expect everything to be preserved can we? But such a BIG glaring gap.....????? That enormous jump from single celled organisms to such incredible diversity...
We find multi-cellular life in the fossil record at least 100 million years before the Cambrian (see the "Ediacaran Fauna), while Bangiomorpha pubescens (see [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_algae]"red algae") appears 1.2 billion years ago, 600 million years further into the past. That's 700 million years between the first known multi-cellular life and the "Cambrian Explosion". You claim here is manifestly false.
500 million years is a staggeringly long time for any trace of anything to survive. And even then you're talking about searching rocks for traces of things invisible to the human eye in order to eek out what traces we can of the first stirrings of multi-cellular life. The paucity of the early fossil record is not an excuse, it's a fact."red algae") appears 1.2 billion years ago, 600 million years further into the past. That's 700 million years between the first known multi-cellular life and the "Cambrian Explosion". You claim here is manifestly false.
500 million years is a staggeringly long time for any trace of anything to survive. And even then you're talking about searching rocks for traces of things invisible to the human eye in order to eek out what traces we can of the first stirrings of multi-cellular life. The paucity of the early fossil record is not an excuse, it's a fact.[]"red algae") appears 1.2 billion years ago, 600 million years further into the past. That's 700 million years between the first known multi-cellular life and the "Cambrian Explosion". You claim here is manifestly false.
500 million years is a staggeringly long time for any trace of anything to survive. And even then you're talking about searching rocks for traces of things invisible to the human eye in order to eek out what traces we can of the first stirrings of multi-cellular life. The paucity of the early fossil record is not an excuse, it's a fact."red algae") appears 1.2 billion years ago, 600 million years further into the past. That's 700 million years between the first known multi-cellular life and the "Cambrian Explosion". You claim here is manifestly false.
500 million years is a staggeringly long time for any trace of anything to survive. And even then you're talking about searching rocks for traces of things invisible to the human eye in order to eek out what traces we can of the first stirrings of multi-cellular life. The paucity of the early fossil record is not an excuse, it's a fact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 3:24 AM Beretta 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