Intellegent design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-01-2017, 05:35 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(05-01-2017 09:32 PM)Logisch Wrote:  
(04-01-2017 10:03 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  It is said that the things of GOD are subtle yet profound. Something that may seem to be neither, that relates to intellegent design and sustenance for continued existence is fat...as in fat content in meat.

I'll explain;

-Is it true that fattier tissues hold more caloric value....energy?

Yes. More calories. Calories might be energy but they aren't nutrition.

(04-01-2017 10:03 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  -Is it true that fattier tissues have more flavor or taste?
It's also easier to eat more quickly than lean muscle.

Just because it's more energy doesn't mean it's more beneficial to the body. And fatty things don't always have more flavor. Not to mention, predators of various types have vastly different taste buds than humans. So what tastes good to a human may taste completely different to a dog, or a cat, or a mouse, or any other animal.

Find me a mountain lion that is going to be more drawn to a white tail than a baby cow because it prefers the specific fatty taste of one over the other when the animal is starving and then we can worry about taste.

Quote:So we as meat eaters are naturally drawn to the most beneficial sustenance. And in a more primitive hunting/gathering scheme, the most nutritious prey would actually be easier to spot and catch due to proportions.


I'll leave it alone... not a coincidence and evolution doesn't care remember?

Sorry, I'm done.

peace

You're correct that it isn't a coincidence about how evolution doesn't care, because evolution is just change over time. That's how evolution works.

In a primitive hunting and gathering scheme those that are the best adapted to avoid predators will survive. The predators best adapted to catch prey will survive. Animals will not go off of something based off whether or not it's fatty or tasty, but whether or not they can take it down.

Watch anything on national geographic, and then tell me how many cheetahs get out a set of body fat calipers and measure up the prey they like. Instead, they'll opportunistically go after what they can catch with the least effort.
I did miss this post previously.

I wasn't speaking of other animals diets, just that of man.

Your sincerely post brought up no refutation to what I was initially saying.

All I was attempting to say is that it is more than strange how meat with more fatty content also has more flavor and would be easier to spot and hunt and eat.

Thanks

peace
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 05:38 AM
RE: Untellegent design
(05-01-2017 09:36 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(04-01-2017 10:03 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  -Is it true that fattier tissues have more flavor or taste?

No, it isn't.

At least not for most humans. The sense of smell and taste vary wildly between animals. They're relatively weak amongst the hominids, especially modern humans. More strongly developped amongst the canines, felines and other pure predators for obvious(?) reasons.

To us fat doesn't taste like much of anything in and of itself. Suck on a lump of suet for a while if you're in doubt. Muscle tissue is much tastier.

Fatty foods get their flavour from a variety of molecules derived from spices, curing, cooking, etc. These molecules become concentrated in the fats because they are more soluble in lipids than in the aqueous components.

This is known as the Theory of Intelligent Quisine, or IQ.
I'm aware that fattier tissues may retain spices better leading to a more robust flavor, but that isn't what I am talking about.

Cool a steak without seasoning it on an open flame and then tell me the fattier sections aren't more delectable and easier to consume.

peace
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 05:41 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(05-01-2017 11:22 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(05-01-2017 10:04 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I'm just pissy cuz I always come here with this idea that at least someone will admit they can at least see my point. But everyone acts as if they don't for whatever reasons.

Perhaps the reason is that we didn't see your point because you didn't make one. Nothing more malicious than that.

You tried to lead us around with a lot of Socratic questioning. That's a fine approach under the correct conditions, but when your audience approaches things from a wildly different worldview, you have to employ it with caution, if at all. Odds are that the different starting assumptions are going to lead to a very different answer from the one intended and frustration for all involved.

You'd be better served by making your point in a simple, straightforward fashion. That way I don't have to try and shoehorn myself into your head, make a lot of faulty assumptions about your thinking, and end up talking at cross-purposes. Saves trouble all around.

And don't title your thread "Intelligent Design" if you want polite conversation on an atheist forum. ID is the morally bankrupt attempt by the "Discovery Institute" to pimp religion in the science classroom as outlined in their Wedge document. It's like waving a flag in front of a bull. You may have meant something different but you are going to have a damned hard time making yourself heard after that intro. I'd have as much success giving a sermon on rational atheism titled "Crackers and Jesus Juice". That'll fly just fine around here where most people already agree with those sentiments. Less effective if I delivered it from the pulpit.
Duly noted.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes popsthebuilder's post
06-01-2017, 05:42 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(06-01-2017 12:09 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(05-01-2017 09:41 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Since you couldn't figure it out due to my own inadequacies I'll spell it out; I left it open and in question form and without wholly making conclusions in hopes that one might stumble upon what I was getting at. No doubt a good few did; but lack the decency to man up and even mention it on an intellectual level, let alone actually discuss it.

I'm not upset that I can't spell, and shit. I've known that for some time.

It really is sad though, what passes for intellect these days. Fucking spelling and grammar.


Pretty good critical thinking skills being able to see past those horrible grammatical errors and intentionally underdeveloped and or executed points

By the way; I'm pretty sure you misspelled something. dick


Fucking hell, do you ever not stop making shit up? Now your complete and utter lack of communication skills was a purposeful act on your part? You purposely failed to convey what you actually meant, as a subversive bread crumb trail? You left your point 'intentionally underdeveloped', as opposed to being either entirely unable to develop it, or it being a meaningless point to develop?

Yeah, you go fuck yourself. It's never your fault for failure to communicate, it's everyone else's fault for not getting it.

Have you heard the old adage about assholes?

If you wake up in the morning and meet an asshole, then you met an asshole. If you go to sleep and everyone you met that day was an asshole? You're the asshole.

[Image: 58586231.jpg]

Also, you forgot to capitalize the 'd' in dick, dickhead.
I didn't capitalize it intentionally.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 05:49 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(06-01-2017 02:18 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  You want to be taken serious Pops? Here you go:

Lets assume, there is a creative force behind evolution an abiogenesis. What makes you think its your particular god in your particular version of god, and why should we believe it?
Easy; there is no particular god. There is only one GOD of creation.

Why should you believe in IT?

I'm not insisting any should believe in it based on my words. There are multiple reasons why belief in the One Creator GOD would benefit all life as a whole. Namely peace, prosperity and technological and societal advancement behind anything we have seen to date.

There are more, but again; I don't insist any should believe, I insist that people should, without pride, sincerely seek out GOD by whatever means possible for them individually.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 05:53 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(06-01-2017 02:56 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(05-01-2017 10:04 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I'm just pissy cuz I always come here with this idea that at least someone will admit they can at least see my point. But everyone acts as if they don't for whatever reasons.

I am thin skinned it seems right now. Thanks for pointing it out. It doesn't help anything either.

Regardless, this thread is quite past pointless for me now as it is more than obvious than none care to talk seriously about the initial topic at hand.

Good night and peace with all sincerity.


I do apologise for the needless negative ramblings and appreciate your ability to point them out in such a manner that is conducive to my desisting from said behavior.

You have no point.

Explain to us how and why your all-knowing benevolent *intelligent designer* designed the systems that allowed thousands of babies to be born with genetic disorders and die from cancer during the past month, and then explain to us how and why the "intelligent design" permits and allows more than 50 % of all human conceptions to fail and spontaneously abort. He's kind of a piss-poor designer now, isn't he ?
Those are due mostly to humans capacities. Mortality rates in infants and fetuses are directly related to the actions and direction of man.

Do you really think that if all people were utterly unified and peaceful and giving to one another that we as a whole wouldn't have found ways to negate such things as infantile desease, birth defects, and the like?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 05:54 AM (This post was last modified: 06-01-2017 06:14 AM by popsthebuilder.)
RE: Intellegent design
(06-01-2017 03:01 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(06-01-2017 02:56 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You have no point.

Explain to us how and why your all-knowing benevolent *intelligent designer* designed the systems that allowed thousands of babies to be born with genetic disorders and die from cancer during the past month, and then explain to us how and why the "intelligent design" permits and allows more than 50 % of all human conceptions to fail and spontaneously abort. He's kind of a piss-poor designer now, isn't he ?

Let me guess...

1 - Who Are You To Question God's Evident Design?
2 - We Cannot Understand God, Just Take It On Faith!

Both answers are piss poor, and if he had even an ounce of intellectual honesty, he would be ashamed of himself; but we all know that's not going to happen.
Don't put words in my mouth.

I never said those things, not would not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 06:01 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(05-01-2017 09:30 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(05-01-2017 10:05 AM)julep Wrote:  Nothing more "intellegent" than comparing people who disagree with you on the internet to Nazis.
A grammar Nazi ass. Get over it

Ah, yes, the words of a man radiating peace and hope. It's incomprehensible how we keep misunderstanding your message.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like julep's post
06-01-2017, 06:17 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(06-01-2017 06:01 AM)julep Wrote:  
(05-01-2017 09:30 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  A grammar Nazi ass. Get over it

Ah, yes, the words of a man radiating peace and hope. It's incomprehensible how we keep misunderstanding your message.
I don't radiate those things at this time. They are things to keep close and to reflect on as often as possible, and to act on at every conceivable junction. Those things will radiate off of me eventually, but now it is enough, and good to just attempt to keep them as virtues in all things. This can be difficult at times.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 06:34 AM (This post was last modified: 06-01-2017 06:40 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: Intellegent design
(06-01-2017 05:49 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Easy; there is no particular god. There is only one GOD of creation.

Prove it.

Also how you would disprove existence of multiple creator gods acting in concert?

Quote:I'm not insisting any should believe in it based on my words. There are multiple reasons why belief in the One Creator GOD would benefit all life as a whole. Namely peace, prosperity and technological and societal advancement behind anything we have seen to date.

And how exactly that would look like?

Peace - schism among one sect is far from impossible and there are other reason for war, not only (and maybe not even primarily) religion.
Prosperity... - belief in one particular childish fable would made people more eager to co-operate and solve shit? In your fantasy it might be so but reality begs to differ I would say.

I wonder how will you back your assertions.

Quote:There are more, but again; I don't insist any should believe, I insist that people should, without pride, sincerely seek out GOD by whatever means possible for them individually.

Bring evidence of existence of that alleged god. I insist too.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: