What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-03-2013, 02:39 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
Heywood: Try asking Egor about what he believes in, before you get all fond of him.

Egor: Is Heywood just as misguided as the rest of us, or does he get some credit for believing in a God? I don't know exactly what kind of cristian he is, but from your point of view, he will go to hell too since he's not a veridician, right?

Oh and welcome back Egor. Now fuck off please, this is getting old. Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jakel's post
02-03-2013, 02:51 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(02-03-2013 02:39 AM)Jakel Wrote:  Heywood: Try asking Egor about what he believes in, before you get all fond of him.

Egor: Is Heywood just as misguided as the rest of us, or does he get some credit for believing in a God? I don't know exactly what kind of cristian he is, but from your point of view, he will go to hell too since he's not a veridician, right?

Oh and welcome back Egor. Now fuck off please, this is getting old. Dodgy
I already know what Egor believes. He believes that God is monistic and that we should strive to become Christ ourselves.
That is insufficeint cause for me to shun him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 03:04 AM
 
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(02-03-2013 02:51 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  That is insufficeint cause for me to shun him.


Thanks. And I wouldn't shun you either. Anyone who loves God and is in here taking heat is my friend. Because that just proves the power of Christ. Look at all these others who have to have the entire forum agreeing with them in order to stand up and express themselves, and when they do it's illogic and insults. You come in here and no one supports you and you stand up for the existence of God, and you don't insult anyone.

That's the power of Christ. That's a fighter. That's strength and power. That's just down right cool. Never retreat--just reload.

Praise God and pass the ammo, I say. Yes
Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 04:03 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(02-03-2013 03:04 AM)Egor Wrote:  That's the power of Christ. That's a fighter. That's strength and power. That's just down right cool. Never retreat--just reload.

Praise God and pass the ammo, I say. Yes

@ Heywood

^Still think atheism is the leading cause of mass shootings? Consider

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
02-03-2013, 04:54 AM (This post was last modified: 02-03-2013 08:41 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
Another Dunning-Kruger victim : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%...ger_effect
"Fitness Paradigm" = "Survival of the Fittest" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest
Tautology : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology
Actually what Dawkins said in the video does not contradict in any way "Survival of the Fittest", and therefore the OP is a tautology, and this entire thread is redundant, superfluous, and attempts to create a distinction without a difference, and an additional step in a process which is already accounted for in the already extant Theory of Evolution. http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index...difference
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction...difference
The reason Evolution "happens" is not that one element of it was "designed", but because the Laws of Probability, in general, are operant. The random mutation, and reproduction of individuals in a species with favorable traits is all about the random mutations and the favorabe trait(s). That part of the process requires no "design". Probability is already operant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_theory
"Survival of the fitest" IS "natural selection", and is nothing new. The reason natural selection works is because the mutations promote adaptation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptation
None of these steps in any way require a "designer". They are all aready accounted for and explained by the theory.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-03-2013, 05:33 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(02-03-2013 02:01 AM)Egor Wrote:  
(28-02-2013 09:40 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no debate here. You mistake disagreement for debate. You presented some unsupported assertions.

When you have an argument supported by evidence, then we can debate.



How can you say that? Is that just the knee-jerk reactions of modern atheists? Religious atheists?

He posted the video. He indicated which part he disagreed with. He presented biological evidence and sound reasoning.

You making that blanket atheist-statement makes you look scared and stupid.

He presented no evidence and no sound reasoning, simply a weird interpretation of convergent evolution.

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
02-03-2013, 06:39 AM
 
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(02-03-2013 05:33 AM)Chas Wrote:  He presented no evidence and no sound reasoning, simply a weird interpretation of convergent evolution.


You're delusional. Your basis of reasoning is simply whether or not something supports atheism. If it doesn't, it's not true or logical or whatever.

You don't even bother to offer a counter-argument.
Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 07:14 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(02-03-2013 06:39 AM)Egor Wrote:  
(02-03-2013 05:33 AM)Chas Wrote:  He presented no evidence and no sound reasoning, simply a weird interpretation of convergent evolution.


You're delusional. Your basis of reasoning is simply whether or not something supports atheism. If it doesn't, it's not true or logical or whatever.

You don't even bother to offer a counter-argument.

No counter-argument is necessary. He misunderstands evolution.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
02-03-2013, 08:47 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(02-03-2013 02:01 AM)Egor Wrote:  He posted the video. He indicated which part he disagreed with. He presented biological evidence and sound reasoning.

You making that blanket atheist-statement makes you look scared and stupid.

Nope. The Green Dick chaplain forgot to explain how and why, and present an argument. Speaking of knee-jerk blanket reaction, here we have the Green Dick Hurling champion chaplain hurling insults again. Chas wishes HE could be so Jebus-like, and hurl like a pro. At this rate, with the Green Dick chaplain back we can ALL learn to be just like Mike , oops Jebus, and hurl like a professional religious hurler.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 09:16 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(02-03-2013 02:01 AM)Egor Wrote:  How can you say that? Is that just the knee-jerk reactions of modern atheists? Religious atheists?

He posted the video. He indicated which part he disagreed with. He presented biological evidence and sound reasoning.

You making that blanket atheist-statement makes you look scared and stupid.

He presented evidence of convergent evolution, which is well within the theory of evolution. He gives no evidence that is not explained by the current theory. To say he presented sound reasoning is to admit a lack of understanding of the theory. Next...

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Adenosis's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: