Science/Environment Explaining evolution and natural selection.

[Chief]

They can use computers?

Give it a couple hundred million years.

 

[chelseacarlton]

Why does proof of evolution disprove the existence of a creator?

Because you haven’t provided evidence that the universe or life requires a creator, nor have you come to terms that Trump won’t be inaugurated again.

 

[ferball]

For the "but we've never seen evolution in action" crowd.

'It's an interesting evolutionary process we're watching': Brolgas and cranes 'crossing the dancefloor' in northern Queensland

An "evolutionary dance" is taking place in the Gulf Country of northern Queensland as two similar, but separate, species of bird are crossbreeding to produce a new hybrid species.

www.abc.net.au

Is that natural selection?

 

[ferball]

Because you haven’t provided evidence that the universe or life requires a creator, nor have you come to terms that Trump won’t be inaugurated again.

That isn't how it works.

The two things are separate categories and don't relate to each other.

So called proof of evolution just makes current theories of evolution harder to disprove. Nothing is ever proven. You can only prove or disprove by measurement. By definition God is immeasurable. Its outside of spacetime and not a discrete event that can be measured and compared to a control. Trying to use evolution to disprove the existence of a creator is as meaningless as trying to use religion to explain the shape of monkeys.

 

[chelseacarlton]

That isn't how it works.

The two things are separate categories and don't relate to each other.

So called proof of evolution just makes current theories of evolution harder to disprove. Nothing is ever proven. You can only prove or disprove by measurement. By definition God is immeasurable. Its outside of spacetime and not a discrete event that can be measured and compared to a control. Trying to use evolution to disprove the existence of a creator is as meaningless as trying to use religion to explain the shape of monkeys.

“By definition God is immeasurable. Its outside of spacetime and not a discrete event that can be measured and compared to a control”.
Nonsense on stilts

 

[ferball]

“By definition God is immeasurable. Its outside of spacetime and not a discrete event that can be measured and compared to a control”.
Nonsense on stilts

Whatever....

There is a saying.

"Never argue with a fool. People might not know the difference."

 

[chelseacarlton]

Whatever....

There is a saying.

"Never argue with a fool. People might not know the difference."

“God is a purple diamond the size of a fist wedged up the arse of a yet to be discovered primate in the heart of the Amazon wearing a pink baseball cap with Higgs Boson written in gold type”.
Russels Teapot.

 

[ferball]

“God is a purple diamond the size of a fist wedged up the arse of a yet to be discovered primate in the heart of the Amazon wearing a pink baseball cap with Higgs Boson written in gold type”.
Russels Teapot.

If there is a God how would you measure it and show evidence of its existence?

Humour me, its a hypothetical situation.

 

[Snake_Baker]

That isn't how it works.

The two things are separate categories and don't relate to each other.

So called proof of evolution just makes current theories of evolution harder to disprove. Nothing is ever proven. You can only prove or disprove by measurement. By definition God is immeasurable. Its outside of spacetime and not a discrete event that can be measured and compared to a control. Trying to use evolution to disprove the existence of a creator is as meaningless as trying to use religion to explain the shape of monkeys.

By christ you post some utter utter shite at times.

 

[ferball]

By christ you post some utter utter sh*te at times.

I put you off ignore for that.

What would you know about it?

You can't prove things with science, only disprove them. Otherwise everything remains as an accepted theory or model of how things work. Everything is always falsifiable, potentially at least. There is no other way to do actual science, especially not Tef's manly man's sciencism for the unwoke. You should know that.

Don't bother responding. I'm not gonna read it.

 

[Chief]

Is that natural selection?

The environment has brought these birds together and something new has been created. Will it fill a niche more successfully than its original parent species?

 

[ferball]

The environment has brought these birds together and something new has been created. Will it fill a niche more successfully than its original parent species?

Who knows. I guess if they can produce offspring that can keep breeding (aren't sterile) then its a possibility. And that seems to be the case.

Its amazing that they are claiming their dancing is possibly responsible...

Darwin hypothesised about sexual selection when he did his work. Few people believed him or took it seriously but its been gaining momentum as an relevent theory for the last 40 or 50 years. Especially this century. This takes it to a new level.... an interspecies dance club.

This is genuinely fascinating.

 

[chelseacarlton]

If there is a God how would you measure it and show evidence of its existence?

Humour me, its a hypothetical situation.

Dunno mate, you’re the ******* one making claims about it, you tell me?

 

[Chief]

That isn't how it works.

The two things are separate categories and don't relate to each other.

So called proof of evolution just makes current theories of evolution harder to disprove. Nothing is ever proven. You can only prove or disprove by measurement. By definition God is immeasurable. Its outside of spacetime and not a discrete event that can be measured and compared to a control. Trying to use evolution to disprove the existence of a creator is as meaningless as trying to use religion to explain the shape of monkeys.

It is evidence that things weren’t created as is. Which is an argument for or “proof” of god.

Religionists then sometimes fall back to the argument that the world was created, then God let his world evolve according to his plan.

God of gaps and all that.

 

[chelseacarlton]

You can't prove things with science, only disprove them.

This is your claim and it is utter gutter slime trash, something a christian apologist would say, in fact, everything you write appears to be straight out of the Christian apologetics playbook.
So be honest, what sites books or apologists do you admire?
Or how bout this comrade, give me your ten best arguments for the existence for the “god” you continue to be making claims on behalf of and we have something to work with?
Spaceless, timeless, immaterial etc will not cut it, those things describe nothing, which only works in favour of my argument that god is nothing, as in, non existence inside or outside of this particular universe, that the universe nor the life in it requires a creator, nor first cause etc, that the universe is an entirely natural occurrence and that life in it was inevitable given the nature of its age, size, elements and energy sources available to it.
God is an agency created in the minds of our prehistoric forebears to explain unknown phenomenon, a clear cut pattern seeking evolutionary trait of our race against predation.
God is unnecessary, prove me wrong and make your ten best argument.....
the floor, lectern, stage, court is yours......

 

[Snake_Baker]

This is your claim and it is utter gutter slime trash.......

You're dealing with a bloke who has an obsession with conveying the notion that he is "wise". He does this via continual reductionism to the point where the discussion loses all meaning.

The idea that "nothing can be proven" is Deepak Chopra level garbage at its finest. No actual person in the material world engages with reality like this. It's pointless.

 

[Chief]

This is your claim and it is utter gutter slime trash

Bit harsh.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Bit harsh.

Turn it up!

This is a discussion about evolution/natural selection that has been hijacked with existential philosophy.

 

[chelseacarlton]

Bit harsh.

No it’s not, it’s a disgusting thing to say about the scientific method that continually does ackchually prove things to be true, factual, actual and beyond doubt or even for ferbs, “most likely”.

 

[Snake_Baker]

No it’s not, it’s a disgusting thing to say about the scientific method that continually does ackchually prove things to be true, factual, actual and beyond doubt or even for ferbs, “most likely”.

The 4 laws of thermodynamics are doing alright, and the fact that evolution is itself a scientific process that evolves, appears to be lost on some folks.

It serves us because it is consistently reliable and there is nothing better to put in its place.

FFS, we see it evolving in front of our eyes on a daily/weekly basis with this world wide viral pandemic. To deny evolution is to deny the existence of dynamic chemical reactions (which actually is evolution). It's absurd.

 

[chelseacarlton]

The 4 laws of thermodynamics are doing alright, and the fact that evolution is itself a scientific process that evolves, appears to be lost on some folks.

It serves us because it is consistently reliable and there is nothing better to put in its place.

FFS, we see it evolving in front of our eyes on a daily/weekly basis with this world wide viral pandemic. To deny evolution is to deny the existence of dynamic chemical reactions (which actually is evolution). It's absurd.

My point to chief was, without stating the bleeding obvious, is that planes fly, boats float, and we know why and how to this occurs due to the very same scientific methods used in evolutionary theory etc.
To say “nothing can be proven” to a child is abuse of that mind, much like a jew came back to life after being dead for 3 days, or that an illiterate Arab flew to heaven on a Buraq, or that an unalterable sky pixie cares what you eat or in which position you choose to mate with someone.
It’s abuse of the mind and is gutter slime.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

If there is a God how would you measure it and show evidence of its existence?

Humour me, its a hypothetical situation.

Get him to turn up at the MCG one day and during half time wonder out to the centre circle and say "Hi all, I'm god, how you all doing?....ha ha no need to answer, I know.....by the way, I'm going to get Richmond to lose this game"

 

[chelseacarlton]

If there is a God how would you measure it and show evidence of its existence?

Humour me, its a hypothetical situation.

Ok, I’ve decided to humour you, even though it’s a ridiculous fallacious situation to be put in.
You would measure the existence of god using the same methods/instruments one would use to prove the existence of unicorns or fairies, Santa Clause, vampires, werewolves, fire breathing dragons, things of that nature or non existence or fantasy or any other way would would go about proving a negative.

Now how would you come to the conclusion that a “god” would go about actually existing, giving the evidence for one, is zero?

 

[Snake_Baker]

My point to chief was, without stating the bleeding obvious, is that planes fly, boats float, and we know why and how to this occurs due to the very same scientific methods used in evolutionary theory etc.
To say “nothing can be proven” to a child is abuse of that mind, much like a jew came back to life after being dead for 3 days, or that an illiterate Arab flew to heaven on a Buraq, or that an unalterable sky pixie cares what you eat or in which position you choose to mate with someone.
It’s abuse of the mind and is gutter slime.

Welcome to postmodernism.

 

[ferball]

It is evidence that things weren’t created as is. Which is an argument for or “proof” of god.

Religionists then sometimes fall back to the argument that the world was created, then God let his world evolve according to his plan.

God of gaps and all that.

The world is constantly changing. Obviously if there is a creator of some sort they created processes not static situations.

And lets face it setting up functional processes leading to greater levels of complexity over time is certainly a more impressive feat than just creating a static situation. Building ... well designing a train is more impressive than drawing one. Which makes me wonder why fundies are finding these subtle ways to diss god.

I know Christians who think evolution is real (and the big bang for that matter.) They think DNA is a significantly more impressive creation than the Fundy version of creation. But I don't think they think its evidence for god's existence as such. The person who best illustrates this is my mum. She makes a clear delineation between reality and what reality is with her faith included. She specifies that faith is a testable process and so reality will test it. The fact there is no actual evidence for the existence of God is a test of her faith.

And yeah I know.... but she is my mum so you lot shut up. And I guess she has more scientific cred than most people posting here. (Ie Groundbreaking PhD in plant genetics 50 odd years ago, decades of work teaching and then designing science curricula including national ones. etc etc.) Its interesting the mental gymnastics people go thru to maintain their irrational fantasies. Look at chelseacarlton and their incredibly strawmannish idea that I am some sort of Christian apologist.

The point is this process (existence, the universe, whatever) is happening, we have no idea beyond the basics how it started, there is a point beyond which we can say nothing because our models break down (the big bang).

We can speculate about the ultimate nature of the universe, something we didn't evolve to perceive, and that might include the considertion of a some sort of creator. This is all philosophy.

And we can measure aspects of it and make incredibly detailed descriptions of the process those aspects of the universe undergo. This is science.