LA public schools using bibles to teach science
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-06-2015, 07:59 AM
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
(20-06-2015 07:20 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(20-06-2015 07:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  Your question about consciousness is an obvious God of the gaps ploy.
We have not yet explained consciousness - that does not mean it is inexplicable without resorting to gods or souls or other woo.

"God of the gaps" is just another argument from ignorance.

First off, it isn't a God of the gaps argument, because we are actually using arguments for dualism, namely the Argument From Consciousness, and the Argument from Intentionality, and it is based on these kind of arguments that we draw the conclusion. See how that works?

Now sure, you can try to refute those arguments...but until you do that, all of this God of the Gaps stuff is just an old fashioned quip by atheists to theists, which is just played-out here in 2015.

The arguments are empty musings absent evidence. There is no evidence for dualism, no evidence for a mechanism for dualism; all of the evidence supports brain-based consciousness.

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
20-06-2015, 03:25 PM
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
So ,call of the wild. I am sure everyone has asked you already but, what are your reasons for thinking that Evolution doesn't exist, you cannot claim there is no evidence since there is years and years of scientific evidence from the fossil records to our DNA research showing the dna likeness between all species of all the animals, or the fact that no fossils of higher evolved life forms exist in lower ones, such as finding a human fossil where a Hadean era animal in where the Triassic era is, or a Human fossil in the Hadean era or any animal fossils where they simply could never possibly had been such as a Kangaroo fossil on top of a mountain in the middle east, dessert or anything like that.

So what is your reason?


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2015, 04:40 PM (This post was last modified: 20-06-2015 05:03 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
(20-06-2015 07:20 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  First off, it isn't a God of the gaps argument, because we are actually using arguments for dualism, namely the Argument From Consciousness, ...

Argument From Consciousness

1. Genuinely nonphysical mental states exist.
2. There is an explanation for the existence of mental states.
3. Personal explanation (PE) is different from natural scientific explanation (NSE).
4. The explanation for the existence of mental states is either a PE or a NSE.
5. The explanation is not an NSE.
6. Therefore the explanation is a PE.
7. If the explanation is PE, it is theistic.
8. Therefore, the explanation is theistic.

Premise 1 is complete bullshit. The Argument from Consciousness is not an argument for dualism, it is an argument which requires and presumes dualism. You need to provide a plausible mechanism of action for premise 1. How could nonphysical mental states exists? Many have tried, all have failed. Next.

(20-06-2015 07:20 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  ... and the Argument from Intentionality,

Argument from Intentionality

P1: If God does not exist, then intentional states do not exist.
P2: Intentional states do exist.
Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.

This one is just fucking stupid. Premise 1 is ridiculous. Why should intentionality require God? Please explain.

(20-06-2015 07:20 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  See how that works?

God you're a fucking idiot. See how that works?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
20-06-2015, 05:35 PM
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
(20-06-2015 07:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  The arguments are empty musings absent evidence.

I feel the same way, but regarding evolution.

(20-06-2015 07:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is no evidence for dualism

There is no evidence for abiogenesis.

(20-06-2015 07:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  , no evidence for a mechanism for dualism;

I feel the same way regarding mind-body naturalism.

(20-06-2015 07:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  all of the evidence supports brain-based consciousness.

What evidence? If the brain came before consciousness, then what is the mechanism within the brain that produced it? Huh? Science is silent in that regard. If the mind came before the brain, then the mind is independent of the brain, which kinda goes back to theism, you know..how God is a mind, a mind that doesn't need the brain to occupy it.

You have a real chicken & egg problem here..and all you can do is fold your arms and pout about it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2015, 06:00 PM
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
(20-06-2015 05:35 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  What evidence? If the brain came before consciousness, then what is the mechanism within the brain that produced it? Huh? Science is silent in that regard.

I'm pretty sure that's what neuroscience is all about and it sure as shit ain't silent in that regard.

(20-06-2015 05:35 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  If the mind came before the brain, then the mind is independent of the brain, which kinda goes back to theism, you know..how God is a mind, a mind that doesn't need the brain to occupy it.

You have a real chicken & egg problem here..and all you can do is fold your arms and pout about it.

There is no chicken and egg problem. The mind is a figment of the imagination of the brain.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
20-06-2015, 06:00 PM
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
Oh, is mr "the brain is made of cartilage" back? He's fun! And since I've had four ciders and three tequila sunrises (yay open bar!) it's just dumb enough to sound funny instead of asinine and irritating.

The idiot who won't read or understand the explanations about how consciousness work, after being told multiple times.

The idiot who doesn't understand what abiogenesis IS and what the evidence for it is. Absent evidence? That's either because he doesn't know or doesn't choose to see. And while willful ignorance is irritating in itself, the celebration of it is indeed abhorrent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like natachan's post
20-06-2015, 06:07 PM (This post was last modified: 20-06-2015 06:14 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
(20-06-2015 06:00 PM)natachan Wrote:  And while willful ignorance is irritating in itself, the celebration of it is indeed abhorrent.




#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2015, 06:13 PM
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
(20-06-2015 03:25 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  So ,call of the wild. I am sure everyone has asked you already but, what are your reasons for thinking that Evolution doesn't exist, you cannot claim there is no evidence since there is years and years of scientific evidence from the fossil records to our DNA research showing the dna likeness between all species of all the animals, or the fact that no fossils of higher evolved life forms exist in lower ones, such as finding a human fossil where a Hadean era animal in where the Triassic era is, or a Human fossil in the Hadean era or any animal fossils where they simply could never possibly had been such as a Kangaroo fossil on top of a mountain in the middle east, dessert or anything like that.

So what is your reason?

My reason is simple, and I've said this before and I will be more than happy to say it again. What is science? Science is based on observation, repeated experiment, and prediction. When you use the scientific method, you will be doing each of those things...making observations, conducting experiments, and making predictions.

Are we good so far? Now..

What is evolution? Well, when you take away all of the bio-babble (technical talk), evolution is the theory that every living organism share a common ancestor...in other words, as you go back in time, there had to be the very FIRST living organism...and all other organisms are the evolutionary successors of that first organism.

That is the theory...and my point is, there is NO evidence for such a theory. Throughout the history of mankind, humans have only observed animals producing what they are, not what they are not. In other words (here it goes...) dogs produce dogs, cats produce cats, fish produce fish. There has NEVER been an exception to this.

Now sure, there are many different varieties within every "kind" of animal? What is a kind? Well..

Dog kind: domestic dog, wolf, coyote, jackal, wild dogs of africa, dingo
Cat kind: lion, tiger, cheetah, leopard, jaguar, cougar, ocelot, domestic cat
Snake: boa constrictor, anaconda, python, mamba, garden snake cobra
Bear kind: brown, grizzly, polar

So you get the picture.

Now, evolutionists believe that long ago, when no one else was around to see, animals were making these crazy transformations, such as a reptile evolving to a bird, and land dwelling whales migrating to the ocean...if that is what you believe, then fine, believe it..but how is that science? You've never OBSERVED these kind of transformations in nature...you've never went to a lab and conducted an EXPERIMENT to get you such results...and you certainly can't make any PREDICTIONS as to when the next changes will occur...so you aren't really doing science, are you? No, you aren't.

So what is your evidence for evolution? You mentioned fossils, but fossils don't prove anything. When you find a fossil, all you are able to determine is "this once living animal is now deceased, and here are its remains". Anything beyond that is speculation. You don't know if that fossil had any children...and you certainly don't know if that fossil had different children.

And if fossils is evidence, then of all of the millions of animals that have lived and died in the history of life, we should find thousands upon thousands of transitional fossils...but we don't.

In my humble opinion, the only reason evolution is even a theory is because unbelievers who are scientific-minded, they need some kind of an explanation as to where different varieties of life came from. They need something. If the God Hypothesis is out of the equation, then they need to come up with some kind of NATURALISTIC way of explaining this stuff, and evolution is the only game in town. It has to be true for them. It has to be...otherwise, they are opening the door and stepping into a place that they don't want to be in, and we can't have that, can we?

The second reason why I don't believe in evolution is because of the abiogenesis problem. If you don't have a viable/confirmed theory as to how life originated naturally, then there is no way in hell you can say with 100% confidence that species originated naturally. If abiogenesis is false, then you can't get to a naturalistic origin of species if you don't have a naturalistic origin of life. For the atheist, evolution depends on abiogenesis being true, but if you can't prove abiogenesis true, then you can't prove evolution to be true.

It is the cart before the horse fallacy.

The third reason why I don't believe in evolution is I don't believe a mindless and blind process is capable of producing specified complexity, which is kinda going into the argument from design. For example, the body mechanism of a whale that is now strictly water dwelling, which evolved from a body mechanism that was previously land dwelling, I don't think a mindless and blind process is capable of producing that kind of specified result. Human beings with our technology and intellect cant even create human organisms with internal bodily configurations which would allow a human to go from land based, to water based...yet, a mindless and blind process can?

I am a reasonable man, in my opinion, and I just can't believe something like that.

However, there is another issue involving the question of theists, particularly Christian theists that believe in evolution. My thoughts? Well, that is an internal debate within Christianity. I disagree with any Christian that believe God used evolution as a means of creation. Could God have used evolution? Yes. Do I believe that he did? No. I have my reasons for that, and I guess we just agree to disagree.

But those are my reasons.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2015, 06:23 PM
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
(20-06-2015 06:13 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(20-06-2015 03:25 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  So ,call of the wild. I am sure everyone has asked you already but, what are your reasons for thinking that Evolution doesn't exist, you cannot claim there is no evidence since there is years and years of scientific evidence from the fossil records to our DNA research showing the dna likeness between all species of all the animals, or the fact that no fossils of higher evolved life forms exist in lower ones, such as finding a human fossil where a Hadean era animal in where the Triassic era is, or a Human fossil in the Hadean era or any animal fossils where they simply could never possibly had been such as a Kangaroo fossil on top of a mountain in the middle east, dessert or anything like that.

So what is your reason?

My reason is simple, and I've said this before and I will be more than happy to say it again. What is science? Science is based on observation, repeated experiment, and prediction. When you use the scientific method, you will be doing each of those things...making observations, conducting experiments, and making predictions.

Are we good so far? Now..

What is evolution? Well, when you take away all of the bio-babble (technical talk), evolution is the theory that every living organism share a common ancestor...in other words, as you go back in time, there had to be the very FIRST living organism...and all other organisms are the evolutionary successors of that first organism.

That is the theory...and my point is, there is NO evidence for such a theory. Throughout the history of mankind, humans have only observed animals producing what they are, not what they are not. In other words (here it goes...) dogs produce dogs, cats produce cats, fish produce fish. There has NEVER been an exception to this.

Now sure, there are many different varieties within every "kind" of animal? What is a kind? Well..

Dog kind: domestic dog, wolf, coyote, jackal, wild dogs of africa, dingo
Cat kind: lion, tiger, cheetah, leopard, jaguar, cougar, ocelot, domestic cat
Snake: boa constrictor, anaconda, python, mamba, garden snake cobra
Bear kind: brown, grizzly, polar

So you get the picture.

Now, evolutionists believe that long ago, when no one else was around to see, animals were making these crazy transformations, such as a reptile evolving to a bird, and land dwelling whales migrating to the ocean...if that is what you believe, then fine, believe it..but how is that science? You've never OBSERVED these kind of transformations in nature...you've never went to a lab and conducted an EXPERIMENT to get you such results...and you certainly can't make any PREDICTIONS as to when the next changes will occur...so you aren't really doing science, are you? No, you aren't.

So what is your evidence for evolution? You mentioned fossils, but fossils don't prove anything. When you find a fossil, all you are able to determine is "this once living animal is now deceased, and here are its remains". Anything beyond that is speculation. You don't know if that fossil had any children...and you certainly don't know if that fossil had different children.

And if fossils is evidence, then of all of the millions of animals that have lived and died in the history of life, we should find thousands upon thousands of transitional fossils...but we don't.

In my humble opinion, the only reason evolution is even a theory is because unbelievers who are scientific-minded, they need some kind of an explanation as to where different varieties of life came from. They need something. If the God Hypothesis is out of the equation, then they need to come up with some kind of NATURALISTIC way of explaining this stuff, and evolution is the only game in town. It has to be true for them. It has to be...otherwise, they are opening the door and stepping into a place that they don't want to be in, and we can't have that, can we?

The second reason why I don't believe in evolution is because of the abiogenesis problem. If you don't have a viable/confirmed theory as to how life originated naturally, then there is no way in hell you can say with 100% confidence that species originated naturally. If abiogenesis is false, then you can't get to a naturalistic origin of species if you don't have a naturalistic origin of life. For the atheist, evolution depends on abiogenesis being true, but if you can't prove abiogenesis true, then you can't prove evolution to be true.

It is the cart before the horse fallacy.

The third reason why I don't believe in evolution is I don't believe a mindless and blind process is capable of producing specified complexity, which is kinda going into the argument from design. For example, the body mechanism of a whale that is now strictly water dwelling, which evolved from a body mechanism that was previously land dwelling, I don't think a mindless and blind process is capable of producing that kind of specified result. Human beings with our technology and intellect cant even create human organisms with internal bodily configurations which would allow a human to go from land based, to water based...yet, a mindless and blind process can?

I am a reasonable man, in my opinion, and I just can't believe something like that.

However, there is another issue involving the question of theists, particularly Christian theists that believe in evolution. My thoughts? Well, that is an internal debate within Christianity. I disagree with any Christian that believe God used evolution as a means of creation. Could God have used evolution? Yes. Do I believe that he did? No. I have my reasons for that, and I guess we just agree to disagree.

But those are my reasons.

Your misunderstanding of the theory of evolution is epic. Have you ever read any actual science books?

And once again, your incredulity is not an argument.

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
20-06-2015, 06:33 PM (This post was last modified: 20-06-2015 06:41 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: LA public schools using bibles to teach science
(20-06-2015 06:13 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  So what is your evidence for evolution? You mentioned fossils, but fossils don't prove anything. When you find a fossil, all you are able to determine is "this once living animal is now deceased, and here are its remains". Anything beyond that is speculation. You don't know if that fossil had any children...and you certainly don't know if that fossil had different children.

And if fossils is evidence, then of all of the millions of animals that have lived and died in the history of life, we should find thousands upon thousands of transitional fossils...but we don't.

In my humble opinion, the only reason evolution is even a theory is because unbelievers who are scientific-minded, they need some kind of an explanation as to where different varieties of life came from. They need something. If the God Hypothesis is out of the equation, then they need to come up with some kind of NATURALISTIC way of explaining this stuff, and evolution is the only game in town. It has to be true for them. It has to be...otherwise, they are opening the door and stepping into a place that they don't want to be in, and we can't have that, can we?

The second reason why I don't believe in evolution is because of the abiogenesis problem. If you don't have a viable/confirmed theory as to how life originated naturally, then there is no way in hell you can say with 100% confidence that species originated naturally. If abiogenesis is false, then you can't get to a naturalistic origin of species if you don't have a naturalistic origin of life. For the atheist, evolution depends on abiogenesis being true, but if you can't prove abiogenesis true, then you can't prove evolution to be true.

It is the cart before the horse fallacy.

The third reason why I don't believe in evolution is I don't believe a mindless and blind process is capable of producing specified complexity, which is kinda going into the argument from design. For example, the body mechanism of a whale that is now strictly water dwelling, which evolved from a body mechanism that was previously land dwelling, I don't think a mindless and blind process is capable of producing that kind of specified result. Human beings with our technology and intellect cant even create human organisms with internal bodily configurations which would allow a human to go from land based, to water based...yet, a mindless and blind process can?

I am a reasonable man, in my opinion, and I just can't believe something like that.

However, there is another issue involving the question of theists, particularly Christian theists that believe in evolution. My thoughts? Well, that is an internal debate within Christianity. I disagree with any Christian that believe God used evolution as a means of creation. Could God have used evolution? Yes. Do I believe that he did? No. I have my reasons for that, and I guess we just agree to disagree.

But those are my reasons.

Why would you presume to think the theory of evolution has anything whatsoever to do with the foundations of my metaphysics? It doesn't.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: