Intelligent Design or Evolution?

[Schism]

Irrelevent? Ooops. Bad call.


Scientific theory? yeah. It's called making something up 'cause we don't want to believe in a God.

You've got it the wrong way around.You're the one making stuff up.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Fire Storm, there are so many flaws in your argument that I do not know where to start.

 

[MushroomRocket]

darwin intelligently designed evolution. others have intelligently built upon it. so all the evolutionary biologists together are the GOD OF EARTH.

string theorists are trying to become the GOD OF THE UNIVERSE.

 

[Fire Storm]

Too simple to be true huh.


Tell me why my tv hasnt come from my mouse trap? Why can't it?

 

[Richo83]

Irrelevent? Ooops. Bad call.


Scientific theory? yeah. It's called making something up 'cause we don't want to believe in a God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

That shoots your theory right there. Do you know that many proponents of theism are believers in evolution?

 

[Schism]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

That shoots your theory right there. Do you know that many proponents of theism are believers in evolution?

Debating Fire Storm on this will be the equivalent of playing tennis against a brick wall i think

 

[luthor]

Came in here late and can't pretend I've read even a tenth of the 550+ posts on this thread.

However, for those who believe "evolution" explains everything, can I ask these questions:

Where are the myriads of "links" in the fossil record that should exist?
...but just don't

Do you sincerely believe that human beings and other mammals and even other complex life forms "evolved" from single cell organisms that originally "came to life " in some primordial soup?

Why do you unquestionably accept that "evolution" magically advances forward.....why don't species regress at least half the time?

Surely the adaption process doesn't necessarily always make species "smarter", or have to grow more legs, or stand upright instead of remaining quadrupeds?

I can think of many other problems with the Theory of Evolution, which to my mind is just that...a theory...with huge holes in it.

And before anyone stereotypes me as a Creationist, or some kind of religious nutter...I'm not...in my own mind I'm agnostic.

It's just that when weighing up the arguments of ID v Evolution, I inevitably end up asking myself the same question:

WHICH IS THE BIGGER FAIRY STORY?

 

[H2F]

Came in here late and can't pretend I've read even a tenth of the 550+ posts on this thread.

However, for those who believe "evolution" explains everything, can I ask these questions:

Where are the myriads of "links" in the fossil record that should exist?
...but just don't

Do you sincerely believe that human beings and other mammals and even other complex life forms "evolved" from single cell organisms that originally "came to life " in some primordial soup?

Why do you unquestionably accept that "evolution" magically advances forward.....why don't species regress at least half the time?

Surely the adaption process doesn't necessarily always make species "smarter", or have to grow more legs, or stand upright instead of remaining quadrupeds?

I can think of many other problems with the Theory of Evolution, which to my mind is just that...a theory...with huge holes in it.

And before anyone stereotypes me as a Creationist, or some kind of religious nutter...I'm not...in my own mind I'm agnostic.

It's just that when weighing up the arguments of ID v Evolution, I inevitably end up asking myself:

WHICH IS THE BIGGER FAIRY STORY?

Like Einstein was to Newton, Darwin will be shown for who he is in time.

The best we had at the time, and that's it.

Great man, but he of all people would have known that he only had part of the picture.

 

[Schism]

Came in here late and can't pretend I've read even a tenth of the 550+ posts on this thread.

However, for those who believe "evolution" explains everything, can I ask these questions:

Where are the myriads of "links" in the fossil record that should exist?
...but just don't

Do you sincerely believe that human beings and other mammals and even other complex life forms "evolved" from single cell organisms that originally "came to life " in some primordial soup?

Why do you unquestionably accept that "evolution" magically advances forward.....why don't species regress at least half the time?

Surely the adaption process doesn't necessarily always make species "smarter", or have to grow more legs, or stand upright instead of remaining quadrupeds?

I can think of many other problems with the Theory of Evolution, which to my mind is just that...a theory...with huge holes in it.

And before anyone stereotypes me as a Creationist, or some kind of religious nutter...I'm not...in my own mind I'm agnostic.

It's just that when weighing up the arguments of ID v Evolution, I inevitably end up asking myself the same question:

WHICH IS THE BIGGER FAIRY STORY?

Judging by your sig,you like fairy stories.You should stay well away from evolution then.

You're not alone luthor.These types of posts are all over the internet nowadays."oh hai guise...i'm not a creationist BUT <rabid anti-evolution rant>"

 

[H2F]

Judging by your sig,you like fairy stories.You should stay well away from evolution then.

You're not alone luthor.These types of posts are all over the internet nowadays."oh hai guise...i'm not a creationist BUT <rabid anti-evolution rant>"

And about time. Why should something of this significance not be scrutinised and challenged until all intelligent people can universally accept it like we have all other undeniable scientific facts? I too believe that evolution seems to be a major part of the picture but either:

a) There is a lot about it we still do not know about evolution and how it really works.

or

b) There is more to the story here (which is where I sit on this) and that evolution is not the only factor at work

 

[Schism]

And about time. Why should something of this significance not be scrutinised and challenged until all intelligent people can universally accept it like we have all other undeniable scientific facts? I too believe that evolution seems to be a major part of the picture but either:

a) There is a lot about it we still do not know.

or

b) There is more to the story here (which is where I sit on this)

All your arguments amount to:evolution is real,but what is driving it?

To me,that is different from the ID question.

If there is an intelligent designer,why has it taken (if we subscribe to the big bang theory) 13 billion years to get to the point of being barely civilized apes?Wouldn't the designer want us to achieve perfection in as short a time as possible?And if so,why are we based on carbon,and not silicon or even pure energy?

If there is an intelligent designer,he is taking the piss.I'm watching Arsenal vs. Sunderland as i type this.Some of the supporters make a mockery of both evolution,and the idea of an intelligent designer!!

 

[H2F]

All your arguments amount to:evolution is real,but what is driving it?

To me,that is different from the ID question.

If there is an intelligent designer,why has it taken (if we subscribe to the big bang theory) 13 billion years to get to the point of being barely civilized apes?Wouldn't the designer want us to achieve perfection in as short a time as possible?And if so,why are we based on carbon,and not silicon or even pure energy?

If there is an intelligent designer,he is taking the piss.I'm watching Arsenal vs. Sunderland as i type this.Some of the supporters make a mockery of both evolution,and the idea of an intelligent designer!!

Oh man that is a whole other question and I gotta get some sleep.

Do consider the beautiful paradox the universe throws up though... And that is that it is as old as it is in size. A very intricate answer can be deciphered from your question up there with that fact.

Remember if Einstein is right (and he is always right) that if we learn how to travel in time it will mean that we control the age of the universe, and with that comes an undeniable irrelevance of your statement up there. The speed of light in relation to how we perceive it, is all that deems our universe old, because once humans learn to navigate in this dimension the Universe becomes only as old as we as a race are in it

 

[luthor]

But the simple 'proof' is that all organisms are born of other organisms and simple organisms existed before complex organisms, and thus the only way for complex organisms to now exist is through an evolutionary process.

See, that's my problem.

Organisms are indeed "born" of organisms...the same organisms.

If the organisms are happily surviving in their environment, they spawn like organisms and have no reason whatsoever to do anything else.

If the environment turns hostile, the organisms have three choices....die, move to a friendlier environment, or "adapt"

Now somewhere eons ago, there were these aquatic organisms (fish) swimming around in a pond or a lake or a sea or an ocean...which started to "dry up"....and let's say, got very short of water.

Easy...let's just grow some lungs so we can breathe on dry land.????

What?..did they get advance warning of running out of water?

And even if they didn't...and still managed to "evolve" these magic breathing abilities out of water....what the hell did they do about mobility???....

...how long were they floundering around on dry land without arms and legs?

Big blob-fish lying on dry land...thinking to themselves..."Shit....what are we going to eat?"

OK ...an any case let's test the theory....if all the billions of marine animals in all the oceans were tomorrow pulled out of their environment and plonked on solid ground, how many of them would "evolve" the ability to survive even a few hours?

 

[Schism]

See, that's my problem.

Organisms are indeed "born" of organisms...the same organisms.

If the organisms are happily surviving in their environment, they spawn like organisms and have no reason whatsoever to do anything else.

If the environment turns hostile, the organisms have three choices....die, move to a friendlier environment, or "adapt"

Now somewhere eons ago, there were these aquatic organisms (fish) swimming around in a pond or a lake or a sea or an ocean...which started to "dry up"....and let's say, got very short of water.

Easy...let's just grow some lungs so we can breathe on dry land.????

What?..did they get advance warning of running out of water?

And even if they didn't...and still managed to "evolve" these magic breathing abilities out of water....what the hell did they do about mobility???....

...how long were they floundering around on dry land without arms and legs?

Big blob-fish lying on dry land...thinking to themselves..."Shit....what are we going to eat?"

OK ...an any case let's test the theory....if all the billions of marine animals in all the oceans were tomorrow pulled out of their environment and plonked on solid ground, how many of them would "evolve" the ability to survive even a few hours?

You should stick to posting on politics man.Above post is primary school creationist dribble.

 

[luthor]

Judging by your sig,you like fairy stories.You should stay well away from evolution then.

You're not alone luthor.These types of posts are all over the internet nowadays."oh hai guise...i'm not a creationist BUT <rabid anti-evolution rant>"

I'm not "pro" or "anti" either argument.

I'm questioning why it is, that given Creationism seems an unlikely explanation of where we came from, that the only alternative the "Scientists" can come up with, is the equally unlikely theory of "Evolution", which in itself requires more than a little "faith" to believe in

 

[Schism]

I'm not "pro" or "anti" either argument.

I'm questioning why it is, that given Creationism seems an unlikely explanation of where we came from, that the only alternative the "Scientists" can come up with, is the equally unlikely theory of "Evolution", which in itself requires more than a little "faith" to believe in

You said:

Big blob-fish lying on dry land...thinking to themselves..."Shit....what are we going to eat?"

OK ...an any case let's test the theory....if all the billions of marine animals in all the oceans were tomorrow pulled out of their environment and plonked on solid ground, how many of them would "evolve" the ability to survive even a few hours?

So,your argument against evolution is putting a fish on the ground,yelling 'evolve!' and then pointing out that the fish died within minutes.

Evolution is incremental,over billions of years.Which you know well enough,i guess.

 

[luthor]

You should stick to posting on politics man.Above post is primary school creationist dribble.

It's nothing of the sort "man"

You are labeling me a "creationist" because I dare question conventional scientific "explanations" of the origin of the species, despite the fact I clearly stated that I am agnostic.

Your dismissive condescension only shows you up as a narrow minded bigot.

 

[luthor]

Evolution is incremental,over billions of years.Which you know well enough,i guess.

So where are these incremental species in the fossil record?

 

[Schism]

It's nothing of the sort "man"

You are labeling me a "creationist" because I dare question conventional scientific "explanations" of the origin of the species, despite the fact I clearly stated that I am agnostic.

Your dismissive condescension only shows you up as a narrow minded bigot.

You talk about agnosticism and creationism like they are mutually exclusive.

Yes,i have labelled you a creationist.I do this based on close scientific analysis of your posts which contain gems such as these:

What?..did they get advance warning of running out of water?


Big blob-fish lying on dry land...thinking to themselves..."Shit....what are we going to eat?"

Why do you unquestionably accept that "evolution" magically advances forward.....why don't species regress at least half the time?


I can think of many other problems with the Theory of Evolution, which to my mind is just that...a theory...with huge holes in it.

---------

Narrow minded bigot is a bit harsh.All i did was call you a creationist.Are you that ashamed?

 

[luthor]

And the answer to those questions is?

 

[Schism]

And the answer to those questions is...???

Go ask a 5 year old,that is the level your questions are at.

You come in here,admit you haven't read 90% of the posts,then start throwing around childish questions and statements without realizing there are people who actually study this stuff at university level already posting in the thread.

 

[luthor]

You talk about agnosticism and creationism like they are mutually exclusive.]

Nope...you are the one pulling the Mutually Exclusive line

You're saying:

"You don't have implicit faith in the Theory of Evolution...so...therefore you are a dreaded Creationist"

 

[luthor]

Go ask a 5 year old,that is the level your questions are at.

You come in here,admit you haven't read 90% of the posts,then start throwing around childish questions and statements without realizing there are people who actually study this stuff at university level already posting in the thread.

OOhhh...my bad

Didn't realize that this thread is only for the higher intelligentsia....oh poor dimwitted me.

WOW..."people" who study at university...who could ever hope to question their superior intellect.

Now about that fossil record....

 

[Schism]

It's nothing of the sort "man"

You are labeling me a "creationist" because I dare question conventional scientific "explanations" of the origin of the species, despite the fact I clearly stated that I am agnostic.

Your dismissive condescension only shows you up as a narrow minded bigot.

I'm labelling you a creationist despite the fact you say you're an agnostic?The way you worded this would lead anyone to believe that you think the two are mutually exclusive.

Came in here late and can't pretend I've read even a tenth of the 550+ posts on this thread.

I can think of many other problems with the Theory of Evolution, which to my mind is just that...a theory...with huge holes in it.

Obvious creationist rhetoric.

Nope...you are the one pulling the Mutually Exclusive line

You're saying:

"You don't have implicit faith in the Theory of Evolution...so...therefore you are a dreaded Creationist"

Wrong.See above.

Also,saying i said something and then putting it in quotation marks even though it isn't a quote from one of my posts just makes you look silly.

OOhhh...my bad

Didn't realize that this thread is only for the higher intelligentsia....oh poor dimwitted me.

WOW..."people" who study at university...who could ever hope to question their superior intellect.

Now about that fossil record....

Hey all i'm saying is that you admit you haven't read most of the thread,and i'm letting you know the conversation has long since surpassed silly questions like "why don't blob-fishes evolve in 2 minutes lol?".If you are a dimwit like you say,maybe you should stick to the football forums.

 

[H2F]

Go ask a 5 year old,that is the level your questions are at.

You come in here,admit you haven't read 90% of the posts,then start throwing around childish questions and statements without realizing there are people who actually study this stuff at university level already posting in the thread.

What's your point?

I run two companies and have recently ran a large scale project directly for the Professor of Business at one of our major Universities.

This persons complete ineptness of business was astounding to me, yet this person teaches our budding entrepreneurs. We cannot completely dismiss University graduates as like Einstein did, some will make sure they pass so they can practice their passion, but the vast majority will spit out the other end like most academics.

Completely useless...