Blowing Up Darwin

[Sherlock Holmes]

So, I can only agree to agree that your claims to supernatural entities performing un'natural acts like carnival side show freaks are a total bust.

I'll answer on your behalf so we can keep the discussion going (if you actually have a different answer just say so).

Your answer to this question: Is there anything I can do that is not natural? is "No, everything you do is 100% natural and the results of the laws of nature".

So now that that's settled, we can look at the implications of this. Of course the most noteworthy implication is that people who express belief in God and make claims about God and claims that the universe was created are simply natural organisms acting naturally.

Therefore religion itself a natural development, it arose naturally over the course of history and cannot be "blamed" on anyone or anything.

Therefore those who post condemnations of religion and theism and so on are doing nothing more than condemning nature itself, but how can one "blame" the laws of nature for anything? it makes absolutely no sense, it is a paradoxical position, a self contradiction.

 

[Hollie]

I'll answer on your behalf so we can keep the discussion going (if you actually have a different answer just say so).

Your answer to this question: Is there anything I can do that is not natural? is "No, everything you do is 100% natural and the results of the laws of nature".

So now that that's settled, we can look at the implications of this. Of course the most noteworthy implication is that people who express belief in God and make claims about God and claims that the universe was created are simply natural organisms acting naturally.

Therefore religion itself a natural development, it arose naturally over the course of history and cannot be "blamed" on anyone or anything.

Therefore those who post condemnations of religion and theism and so on are doing nothing more than condemning nature itself, but how can one "blame" the laws of nature for anything? it makes absolutely no sense, it is a paradox.

What is natural about religious indoctrination? It's a function of geographic, societal influences.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

What is natural about religious indoctrination? It's a function of geographic, societal influences.

Yes, it is a function of other things but all of those things are natural. You can't get an unnatural effect from natural causes - not if one understands science anyway.

 

[abu afak]

More twice Daily.
The Lying Tw0t PoliticalSheik never stops.
She has NO evidence, only deceptive Quote Mines.

Now she has the Natl Academy of Sciences "refuting" Evo!!
When in fact they will tell you it's the Foundation of Modern Biology.
(along with Darwin himself!! and PRO-EVO Niles Etheridge!!)

The evidence is on my side: Darwin's presumptions are false.
Watch me prove it.
...
1. Even the fossil record definitively rejects the concept of speciation. There is absolutely no sign in the record of the countless intermediate species that should have once lived according to Darwinism. It has now been acknowledged that Darwin's claim that these fossils would be found in the future is definitely incorrect. http://www.nationalacademyofsciencesrefuted.com/regarding_speciation.php

a. “He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)

b. "The difficulty of understanding the absence of vast pile of fossiliferous strata, which on my theory were no doubt somewhere accumulated before the [Cambrian] epoch, is very great. I allude to the manner in which numbers of species of the same group suddenly appear in the lowest known fossiliferous rock."
Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p. 306-307.


2. The discovery of the Burgess Shale deposits pretty much nailed it. The significance of the Burgess Shale discoveries is that the many new body plans show disparity, major differences that separate phyla, classes and orders ....and careful study of earlier fossils did not reveal any evolutionary trail!

a. "During this explosion of fauna, representatives of about twenty of the roughly twenty-six total phyla present in the known fossil record made their first appearance on earth." Meyers, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 31.

b. " To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained. " Charles Darwin On the Sudden Appearance of Groups of Allied Species in the Lowest Known Fossiliferous Strata - Collection at Bartleby.com



This is where you lie and scream "is not!!! Is notttttttt!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Hollie]

Yes, it is a function of other things but all of those things are natural. You can't get an unnatural effect from natural causes - not if one understands science anyway.

So we're back to you being unable to define a single un-natural event in all of human history. Your bibles and Korans are full of tales and fables describing un-natural events. I can only presume you dismiss those tales and fables as fanciful stores written by largely unknown authors.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

So we're back to you being unable to define a single un-natural event in all of human history.

No, were back to lesson 1, todays lesson for you:

Your bibles and Korans are full of tales and fables describing un-natural events. I can only presume you dismiss those tales and fables as fanciful stores written by largely unknown authors.

All of those things arose naturally, blame the laws of nature for what the laws of nature produces, for what else is there to blame?

 

[abu afak]

What is natural about religious indoctrination? It's a function of geographic, societal influences.

You're only doing a So-So job at refuting Sherlock, but a Spectacular one PROMOTING PoliticalChic's OP/Message. (several!)
No one cares or will Ever read what's on page 5, 25, 45, etc, only that this long thread/Headline must be credible.

You've made maybe 20% of all the posts, most gibberish with Sherlock and scruffy. I Shut Sherlock down in ONE post and then don't entertain his ENDLESS deflections/ambiguations/semantic BS.
You have ZERO Tactical ability.

Stop posting in/PROMOTING this thread Bimb0 unless it's a Major Crusher to the OP.

`

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Sherlock Holmes is here to help, willing to teach those who have come off the rails of rational and sensible reasoning.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

These discussions used to be stimulating, I'm used to debating atheists and evolutionists who are of a higher standard, schooled in logic and philosophy and able to put up a strong position. But that ended years ago. These days there are too many pop-science devotees, those who have their own religion of scientism and lack the schooling and rigor of traditional debate.

Anyway my work here is done, time to look for another science thread, hopefully one where fewer of the participants are dimwits, good day to you all.

 

[Hollie]

These discussions used to be stimulating, I'm used to debating atheists and evolutionists who are of a higher standard, schooled in logic and philosophy and able to put up a strong position. But that ended years ago. These days there are too many pop-science devotees, those who have their own religion of scientism and lack the schooling and rigor of traditional debate.

View attachment 1054944

Anyway my work here is done, time to look for another science thread, hopefully one where the participants aren't dimwits, good day to you all.

A spectacular duck and run.

e·li·gion·ism. -jəˌnizəm. plural -s. : strict practice of or devotion to religion. also : exaggerated religious zealotry

 

[PoliticalChic]

yes, trumpanzees are endlessly amusing for those like you, with the mind of a simpleton:

View attachment 1054921

Must be difficult for you to post this, and have voted for this:
Race and gender preferences

Language police

No punishment for criminals

Open borders

Attacks on the Supreme Court

Transgender sports competitions

Antisemitism

Wealth tax

Cancel culture

Welfare State

Government run healthcare mandates

Sanctuary Cities

Two-Tiered Justice system

 

[Frankenstein]

This part is certainly true.


Yes, the fossil chain has a lot of gaps.

It would be unreasonable to expect otherwise

Disagree.

 

[Frankenstein]

There us not s single "phact" in your silly tirade.

You haven't one argument to present, that will show me where it all began so

 

[Frankenstein]

Good gawd you're ignorant. Evolving is adaptation. You don't understand the terms you cut and paste.


This is where you cut and paste from the Disco'tute.

Adaptation is not evolution!
Common mistakes and misconceptions. Evolution is not the same as adaptation or natural selection. Natural selection is a mechanism, or cause, of evolution. Adaptations are physical or behavioral traits that make an organism better suited to its environment.

 

[Hollie]

Adaptation is not evolution!
Common mistakes and misconceptions. Evolution is not the same as adaptation or natural selection. Natural selection is a mechanism, or cause, of evolution. Adaptations are physical or behavioral traits that make an organism better suited to its environment.

Adaptation is a function of natural selection. It's in your Koran.

 

[Hollie]

You haven't one argument to present, that will show me where it all began so

Of course, dear.

 

[scruffy]

I suspect for many creationers, even a perfectly preserved chain of fossil evidence for every intermediary species of every species that ever existed would not meet their standard of evidence. Not without the magical hands of their gods somehow involved.

The re-branding of what was once “Biblical Creationism" which became “Scientific Creationism”, later changed to “Intelligent Design Creationism”, later becoming “Intelligent Design” has always been a product of fundamentalist Christianity.

You can take the fundamentalist out of the church but you can’t take the church out of the fundamentalist.

Well, not to derail the thread but in passing I'll mention that poofing species into existence is a fundamental misreading of the Bible. It's not Christianity's fault, it's institutional doctrine much like was pushed by the Church in the Middle Ages.

This particular version of it is dangerous though. Denial of scientific evidence is a very bad thing. It's bad for everyone, including the deniers. It smacks of Christian Science, where practitioners refuse to see a doctor because they claim faith cures all ills. The fundies aren't quite that bad, but some of them trend in the same direction.

 

[Frankenstein]

Adaptation is a function of natural selection. It's in your Koran.

Sorry I am a Christian not a muslim!
Evolution is the process of how organisms develop/diversify over time. When an organism gradually develops from a simple to a more complex form. Adaptation is the process by which an organism becomes better fitted for their environment to survive.
I do not believe in Evolution! I could put a pile of bones out and it is never going to turn into a human body over time!

 

[Frankenstein]

Of course, dear.

At least you admit it!

 

[scruffy]

Sorry I am a Christian not a muslim!
Evolution is the process of how organisms develop/diversify over time. When an organism gradually develops from a simple to a more complex form. Adaptation is the process by which an organism becomes better fitted for their environment to survive.
I do not believe in Evolution! I could put a pile of bones out and it is never going to turn into a human body over time!

Oh ye of little faith.

Still denying the handiwork of your Creator, I see.

Shall we call you Peter?

(Pete Frankenstein, has a nice ring to it).