I will debate any atheist on here
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-02-2015, 12:46 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 12:33 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 12:24 PM)Job_1207 Wrote:  Thanks!Smile

At work.

Just a point, but how does asexual reproduction fit into the 'Bee story'?

Much cheers to all.

You gotta be kidding me!
We're talking about complex organisms with males and females here. Thats where sexual instinct is supposed to work. Let's not deviate the subject to the sexual instinct of trees and plants, please!

It doesn't matter what I believe; all that matters is what I can prove!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 12:47 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 11:15 AM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 11:04 AM)LostLocke Wrote:  Four pages of unsourced material?
And falsely attributed to Darwin.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_o...production

Not to mention the trihedral pyramidal shape of honeycomb is not optimal three-dimensional geometry. That would a cell end composed of two hexagons and two smaller rhombuses.

ETA: at least as far as we have been able to determine.

But in 2D it is optimal in terms of minimizing total perimeter.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 12:49 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 12:46 PM)Job_1207 Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 12:33 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

Just a point, but how does asexual reproduction fit into the 'Bee story'?

Much cheers to all.

You gotta be kidding me!
We're talking about complex organisms with males and females here. Thats where sexual instinct is supposed to work. Let's not deviate the subject to the sexual instinct of trees and plants, please!

At work.

But you acknowledge the said trees and animals did not just 'Poof' into existence, right?

So...before the trees and animals were/was asexual reproduction., correct?

And please don't call me Shurly. Tongue

Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 12:51 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 12:38 PM)Job_1207 Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 12:20 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  I guess you never seen a flying squirrel.... A mammal, without wings that can do a controlled glide.....

or a Chrysopelea - a snake that can flatten it's body to become an airfoil, and fly from tree to tree.....

....

but ur not a "rocket surgeon".....

I'll make sure I take my rocket to somebody qualified next time it's sick.......

You will be surprised how many animals I have seen, my friend. A lot more than you have, apparently, because if you had seen all the ones I have, you wouldn't be supporting evolution anymore, so don't tell me about animals. Better go borrow a Bible from one of your neighbors (I doubt you have one yourself) and read Job 12:7-9. That part is not religion; it's science. Do you know what science is? Go study a particular subject thoroughly and find out the truth. Go study the animals. And try to explain not just the spots on their fur but the behavior that they have. That will give you a clue about what evolution really isn't... that is, a VALID explanation.

You are so fucked up.

Go read up on homologous and vestigial body parts.

Hey look! A pelvic and femur bones on whales. A coccyx bone on humans. Does that extended finger bone support the bat wing? Wow, who would've thought to look?

The science is all there, that you refuse to accept it is your failing.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 12:55 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 12:20 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 10:57 AM)Job_1207 Wrote:  Well, off the top of my head, sexual instinct. If you want to read about it, I can attach a four and a half-page document you might find interesting. I know it's a lot to ask, (of you to read so many pages) but you wanted me to be specific. Please read that and try to refute my arguments, and then we can take it from there.

Does a snowflake require god to design each one or does it happen with natural crystalline formation?

Perhaps you can comprehend the fundamental flaw in the un-sourced .pdf that you linked.

Your counterexample is ridiculous, at best. You're going to tell me that the males and females of the same species started having sex (despite not having the sexual instinct) because it simply was one on the infinite possibilities in which the atoms forming the cells forming the tissues forming the bodies of the two animals could have possibly interacted? So, theoretically, there were an infinite minus one possibilities in which those atoms could have interacted non sexually, and one possibility in which they could have interacted sexually, is that what you're suggesting? Wow! I'm learning new stuff here by the minute! Talking about thinking!

It doesn't matter what I believe; all that matters is what I can prove!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 01:15 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 12:51 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 12:38 PM)Job_1207 Wrote:  You will be surprised how many animals I have seen, my friend. A lot more than you have, apparently, because if you had seen all the ones I have, you wouldn't be supporting evolution anymore, so don't tell me about animals. Better go borrow a Bible from one of your neighbors (I doubt you have one yourself) and read Job 12:7-9. That part is not religion; it's science. Do you know what science is? Go study a particular subject thoroughly and find out the truth. Go study the animals. And try to explain not just the spots on their fur but the behavior that they have. That will give you a clue about what evolution really isn't... that is, a VALID explanation.

You are so fucked up.

Go read up on homologous and vestigial body parts.

Hey look! A pelvic and femur bones on whales. A coccyx bone on humans. Does that extended finger bone support the bat wing? Wow, who would've thought to look?

The science is all there, that you refuse to accept it is your failing.

Yeah, thanks. What do the homologous and vestigial body parts prove? They prove whatever you want to believe.
I see it this way: Evolution could not have happened without an internal "force" that drove the very atoms forming the cells to do something constructive. I call that force "God" and I don't claim I understand it, but it's not randomness. On the other hand, you say that force is natural selection and it doesn't have to be purposeful. The apparent design in nature. I believe there had to be an internal guiding force because without it you can't explain the key transitions. But the biggest hurdle for evolution is animal behavior that can be seen TODAY, which proves evolution on its own could not have brought those animals here! So I'm not against evolution. I'm against this Bizarro-evolution that seems to be intelligent, self-aware and self sufficient which you are trying to promote.

It doesn't matter what I believe; all that matters is what I can prove!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 01:16 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 12:55 PM)Job_1207 Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 12:20 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Does a snowflake require god to design each one or does it happen with natural crystalline formation?

Perhaps you can comprehend the fundamental flaw in the un-sourced .pdf that you linked.

Your counterexample is ridiculous, at best. You're going to tell me that the males and females of the same species started having sex (despite not having the sexual instinct) because it simply was one on the infinite possibilities in which the atoms forming the cells forming the tissues forming the bodies of the two animals could have possibly interacted? So, theoretically, there were an infinite minus one possibilities in which those atoms could have interacted non sexually, and one possibility in which they could have interacted sexually, is that what you're suggesting? Wow! I'm learning new stuff here by the minute! Talking about thinking!
Are you suggesting goddidit?

Which god would that be?

Also, do you talk to animals, just like the book of Job asserts?

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 01:17 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 01:16 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 12:55 PM)Job_1207 Wrote:  Your counterexample is ridiculous, at best. You're going to tell me that the males and females of the same species started having sex (despite not having the sexual instinct) because it simply was one on the infinite possibilities in which the atoms forming the cells forming the tissues forming the bodies of the two animals could have possibly interacted? So, theoretically, there were an infinite minus one possibilities in which those atoms could have interacted non sexually, and one possibility in which they could have interacted sexually, is that what you're suggesting? Wow! I'm learning new stuff here by the minute! Talking about thinking!
Are you suggesting goddidit?

Which god would that be?

Also, do you talk to animals, just like the book of Job asserts?

Have you ever heard of figures of speech?

It doesn't matter what I believe; all that matters is what I can prove!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 01:20 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 01:17 PM)Job_1207 Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 01:16 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Which god would that be?

Also, do you talk to animals, just like the book of Job asserts?

What difference does that make? Leave religion out of this and try to imagine an amazing force that made this whole evolutionary process possible. Do you think that force would care less whether you went to church on Sunday or not, or to which church?

Have you ever heard of figures of speech?

It doesn't matter what I believe; all that matters is what I can prove!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 01:23 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(09-02-2015 01:17 PM)Job_1207 Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 01:16 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Are you suggesting goddidit?

Which god would that be?

Also, do you talk to animals, just like the book of Job asserts?

Have you ever heard of figures of speech?

You're all over the map, you say you're not Christian, but then you cite biblical references. Which god are you asserting? General deism?

Let's say goddidit, but this particular god set in place all of the mechanisms for the universe to run by itself, including evolution, then this god went out of existence right after the creation of the universe. How would that be different from what we observe today?

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: