Evolution with God?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-02-2013, 06:55 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
(01-02-2013 03:48 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(01-02-2013 02:20 AM)Hamata k Wrote:  Duuuuuuude. What? I don't even....
I'm not dealing with this one.
Same for me. I have wasted enough time on Creationists who have never read a book on biological evolution and are consequently unable to make anything but straw man arguments and attack misrepresentations of the actual scientific theory.

Not to mention that we're dealing with good old flip-flop Egor here. Drinking Beverage
Does he do it to get responses or does he think he has presented a cogent argument against evolution.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Knowledge can be given, Understanding must be earned
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2013, 07:04 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
(01-02-2013 02:12 AM)Egor Wrote:  Darwin discovered the way life evolves. What he didn't realize is how impossible it is for evolution to have progressed without eliminating the very species that are evolving. Being of a medical background, I am very familiar with the blood clotting mechanism, and that sort of thing can't evolve--it has to be in place as it is, or it will kill the animal. (One factor of and the animal bleeds to death, a different one not there and all the blood congeals in the vasculature.). Or the eye, or the liver, or the kidneys, and on and on. The amount of chance mutation that would have to occur is impossible before the species goes extinct.

To believe in evolution as natural selection occuring within a background of chaotic environmental change is magical thinking. The only way to make it not magical thinking is to postulate a being like we think of God--because nothing else is possible.

Not to mention a really easy fact of life: Mutants tend to die off. Seriously, who wants to have sex with someone with six toes? Who wants to have sex with someone whose face doesn't even look like the rest of the human population? And most mutations are destructive, not progressive.

And then look at modern human beings: We're not going to evolve before we die off--there's no way we're going to be around for another hundred thousand years.
Take chest hair for an example. You would think we're moving toward bare chested males because if you look at Magnum PI from the seventies, and guys today, there is a distinct lack of hair. Wrong: it's the fashion to shave chest hair--that's all. We still look the same as we did in the 70's. If in fact guys were loosing their chest hair, they would be less attractive to females because they would be generally weaker and have lower testosterone, so they would die off before we evolved into them.

So, you're a Neadrethal woman, and there's this guy in a cave. He's smart, because he's lost all his hair, but he's learned to wear animal skins. And he's smart, and therefore really good at hunting. Before she bore his children the Neandrethal men would kill him, take his hides, weapons, and food and mate with the woman.
Even one small change is nearly impossible. All the evolution that has occurred, in much more important ways, is even more impossible.

This guy was gay and weak--no chance of him spurring on evolution.




Personal hero of many in here, I'm sure.
Lets count all of the logical fallacies! Consider



Argument from Personal Incredulity #1

"Being of a medical background, I am very familiar with the blood clotting mechanism, and that sort of thing can't evolve--it has to be in place as it is, or it will kill the animal."

The blood clotting mechanism is not irreducibly complex. Dr. Ken Miller would like to have a word with you...









Argument from Ignorance #1

"Or the eye, or the liver, or the kidneys, and on and on. The amount of chance mutation that would have to occur is impossible before the species goes extinct. "









Argument from Personal Incredulity #2

"To believe in evolution as natural selection ocurring within a background of chaotic environmental change is magical thinking. The only way to make it not magical thinking is to postulate a being like we think of God--because nothing else is possible."

Natural Selection is not just random chance, the 'probability' isn't nearly as outlandish as you think. If you'd actually studied evolution from anything other than AnswersInGenesis.com, then you'd already know this.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/chance/chance.html




Argument from Ignorance #2

"Take chest hair for an example. You would think we're moving toward bare chested males because if you look at Magnum PI from the seventies, and guys today, there is a distinct lack of hair. Wrong: it's the fashion to shave chest hair--that's all. We still look the same as we did in the 70's. If in fact guys were loosing their chest hair, they would be less attractive to females because they would be generally weaker and have lower testosterone, so they would die off before we evolved into them."

Evolution is not just purely 'survival of the fittest'. Traits that are advantageous to reproduction are what get passed along, so one of these traits could certainly be less body hear. We certainly are the least hairy of the four great apes, so we've already moved away from thick full body hair. There is no reason to think that we can't continue further along in this trend.




Argument from Ignorance #3

"So, you're a Neadrethal woman, and there's this guy in a cave. He's smart, because he's lost all his hair, but he's learned to wear animal skins. And he's smart, and therefore really good at hunting. Before she bore his children the Neandrethal men would kill him, take his hides, weapons, and food and mate with the woman.Even one small change is nearly impossible. All the evolution that has occurred, in much more important ways, is even more impossible."

That 'guy in a cave' would have been another Neanderthal. The time it takes for different species to arise depends on generations upon generations of cumulative change. Every offspring is the same species as their parent's, it's never proposed that one day a Neanderthal gave birth to a Cro-Magnon, and that single Cro-Magnun was then the start of a whole new species.





[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like EvolutionKills's post
01-02-2013, 07:09 AM (This post was last modified: 01-02-2013 07:16 AM by Chaos.)
RE: Evolution with God?
(31-01-2013 09:02 PM)KindaNewAthiest Wrote:  It seems like a lot of religious people are now somewhat accepting of evolution. They believe that God is the helping hand in making evolution work the way it does. I am looking for what everyone's response is, and how you can refute that claim with evidence? It is something i personally don't know how to answer so I'm looking for your help.
Thanks,
KindaNewAthiest

Believing in god is pointless then. It makes no sense saying "GOD DID IT!"

Btw, I remembered about this video:




"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Benjamin Franklin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chaos's post
01-02-2013, 07:18 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
(01-02-2013 02:12 AM)Egor Wrote:  Darwin discovered the way life evolves. What he didn't realize is how impossible it is for evolution to have progressed without eliminating the very species that are evolving. Being of a medical background, I am very familiar with the blood clotting mechanism, and that sort of thing can't evolve--it has to be in place as it is, or it will kill the animal. (One factor of and the animal bleeds to death, a different one not there and all the blood congeals in the vasculature.). Or the eye, or the liver, or the kidneys, and on and on. The amount of chance mutation that would have to occur is impossible before the species goes extinct.

To believe in evolution as natural selection occuring within a background of chaotic environmental change is magical thinking. The only way to make it not magical thinking is to postulate a being like we think of God--because nothing else is possible.

Not to mention a really easy fact of life: Mutants tend to die off. Seriously, who wants to have sex with someone with six toes? Who wants to have sex with someone whose face doesn't even look like the rest of the human population? And most mutations are destructive, not progressive.

And then look at modern human beings: We're not going to evolve before we die off--there's no way we're going to be around for another hundred thousand years.
Take chest hair for an example. You would think we're moving toward bare chested males because if you look at Magnum PI from the seventies, and guys today, there is a distinct lack of hair. Wrong: it's the fashion to shave chest hair--that's all. We still look the same as we did in the 70's. If in fact guys were loosing their chest hair, they would be less attractive to females because they would be generally weaker and have lower testosterone, so they would die off before we evolved into them.

So, you're a Neadrethal woman, and there's this guy in a cave. He's smart, because he's lost all his hair, but he's learned to wear animal skins. And he's smart, and therefore really good at hunting. Before she bore his children the Neandrethal men would kill him, take his hides, weapons, and food and mate with the woman.
Even one small change is nearly impossible. All the evolution that has occurred, in much more important ways, is even more impossible.

This guy was gay and weak--no chance of him spurring on evolution.




Personal hero of many in here, I'm sure.


Says the guy who thinks paramecia are conscious.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
01-02-2013, 08:36 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
(01-02-2013 02:05 AM)Hamata k Wrote:  Hey now. We need the other side of the argument.
................................................................................​.
................................................................................​..
I don't know what it is.

KC! You know this. Where are you?
I'm not really sure what to address.

Theistic Evolution and Evolutionary Creationism state that evolution is guided by God. TEs say that God created evolution and let it go; ECs say that God created evolution and has an active hand in it.

This, like all beliefs rooted in God, is based on faith. There is no way to refute or prove the claim because it's not based on empirical evidence.

[Image: RHcn6pd.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
01-02-2013, 08:48 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
I can't find any of the videos but Hitchens had a great speech on this topic... basically on the idea of what many Christians accepting evolution would have to believe as they state it.

It was how God created life and set forth evolution, but basically kept off control and watched as he created the human race in it's early turmoil. Let countless other religious ideas spring up over time and not stopping these ideas sprouting up even before they figured out him. Watched humans live and die and supposedly die without the joy of knowing the upcoming afterlife.. Then roughly 2000 years ago decided, okay now it's time I fix their issues by bringing down to take away their sins which in essence creates the contrast of heaven and hell for his believers. And then lets that system be carried out since then doing nothing indistinguishable since.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2013, 09:10 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
(01-02-2013 08:36 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(01-02-2013 02:05 AM)Hamata k Wrote:  Hey now. We need the other side of the argument.
................................................................................​.
................................................................................​..
I don't know what it is.

KC! You know this. Where are you?
I'm not really sure what to address.

Theistic Evolution and Evolutionary Creationism state that evolution is guided by God. TEs say that God created evolution and let it go; ECs say that God created evolution and has an active hand in it.

This, like all beliefs rooted in God, is based on faith. There is no way to refute or prove the claim because it's not based on empirical evidence.
But the empirical evidence shows no outside influence is or was required.

Absence of evidence that should be there is indicative of absence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2013, 09:14 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
(01-02-2013 09:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-02-2013 08:36 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  I'm not really sure what to address.

Theistic Evolution and Evolutionary Creationism state that evolution is guided by God. TEs say that God created evolution and let it go; ECs say that God created evolution and has an active hand in it.

This, like all beliefs rooted in God, is based on faith. There is no way to refute or prove the claim because it's not based on empirical evidence.
But the empirical evidence shows no outside influence is or was required.

Absence of evidence that should be there is indicative of absence.
But, that empirical evidence is incompatible with faith.

The belief that God directed evolution is based on faith... empirical evidence has no bearing on that belief.

[Image: RHcn6pd.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2013, 09:16 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
(01-02-2013 09:14 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(01-02-2013 09:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  But the empirical evidence shows no outside influence is or was required.

Absence of evidence that should be there is indicative of absence.
But, that empirical evidence is incompatible with faith.

The belief that God directed evolution is based on faith... empirical evidence has no bearing on that belief.


Which is why it is irrational and antipathetic to critical thinking.

Hmmm, this road looks familiar. Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
01-02-2013, 09:23 AM
RE: Evolution with God?
(01-02-2013 09:16 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-02-2013 09:14 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  But, that empirical evidence is incompatible with faith.

The belief that God directed evolution is based on faith... empirical evidence has no bearing on that belief.


Which is why it is irrational and antipathetic to critical thinking.

Hmmm, this road looks familiar. Consider
Indeed it does.

[Image: RHcn6pd.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: