Blowing Up Darwin

[Sherlock Holmes]

It needs to be said that Creationers are not working on any problem solving or investigation.

No, we're not because we know that God created everything and so there's not much more to say about that.

Their sacred cows are sacrosanct and no questioning of the religion is allowed. They need to be honest with themselves and others. Creationer ministries have a common theme which is a ''statement of faith" that requires total and unquestioning allegiance to biblical rhetoric. That is nothing more than forced acceptance of the ideology.

You have no idea how the universe came to exist, none, not a clue. You must believe in magic, the magical ability for laws to just "pop" into existence uncaused, that's how deluded atheists are. Science is based on cause and effect so what caused the first cause?

You are stuck, and as I pointed out already you are happy to lie to yourself and pretend a paradox is not a paradox, this is the level of intellectual rigor I've come to expect from a largely uneducated country that voted for Trump. You too are unschooled, perhaps you were home schooled by those doting parents that spoiled you when you were a kid.

 

[abu afak]

Evolution "theory" has No Predictive power - that's rather a serious shortcoming in a scientific theory.

Like all of Your Idiotc argumentation this is False.

1. Evolution /Scientists Predict/have correctly PREDICTED and found "Tweeners" as only Evo could predict.

2. We also have anatomoval vestiges of our ancestors. For Humans, the Coccyx, Wisdom Teeth, etc, etc.

An immaculate 'Creation' event would have either of the above Two.

Tell me, how do we test the proposition (or rather belief in this case) that a bacterium can eventually give rise to a worm say?

We find tweeners. Again
How do we test intergalactic astronomy and its history? Big Bang? REMNANT evidence. No test.
Some sciences are observational.

You are an empily argmentative Jackass.
an Idiotic and Disingenuous ambiguator with No topical knowledge.
Go argue in politics where everyting is subjective.

`

And HOLLY, STFU, you don't have the knowledge to crush these Bugs in the One post it actrulaly takes.
You're just showing that.
AND you are PROMOTING "Blowing up Darwin" with your wasted ENDLESS posting.

These 'debates' with the BS idiot Sherlock are endlesss as he bobs and weaves/ambiguates/Philosophises facts away.

`

 

[Hollie]

No, we're not because we know that God created everything and so there's not much more to say about that.

You have no idea how the universe came to exist, none, not a clue. You must believe in magic, the magical ability for laws to just "pop" into existence uncaused, that's how deluded atheists are. Science is based on cause and effect so what caused the first cause?

You are stuck, and as I pointed out already you are happy to lie to yourself and pretend a paradox is not a paradox, this is the level of intellectual rigor I've come to expect from a largely uneducated country that voted for Trump. You too are unschooled, perhaps you were home schooled by those doting parents that spoiled you when you were a kid.

I see you're incensed that scientists are looking for the answers to the beginning of the universe. What was the first cause of your gods? Was it a hierarchy of gods with your gods being the "also ran" gods?:

O the other hand, you screech out, " the gawds did it" yet you can't offer a shred of evidence for your gods.
It takes no "intellectual rigor" to mindlessly accept the religious tales and fables you were given.

You're just a run of the mill Bible thumper. While you rocking back and forth memorizing your Bible verses, you were denied any exposure to math and the sciences.


Sorry about the times in your madrassah when you were abused by your prayer leader. You have a debilitating case of "madrassah syndrome,".

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I see you're incensed that scientists are looking for the answers to the beginning of the universe. What was the first cause of your gods? Was it a hierarchy of gods with your gods being the "also ran" gods?:

God is not subject to laws, God created laws laws did not create anything nor can they.

O the other hand, you screech out, " the gawds did it" yet you can't offer a shred of evidence for your gods.

The presence of the universe is evidence of God, what else could it possibly be evidence of?

It takes no "intellectual rigor" to mindlessly accept the religious tales and fables you were given.

Religions are products of the human mind, God is not religious nor am I.

You're just a run of the mill Bible thumper. While you rocking back and forth memorizing your Bible verses, you were denied any exposure to math and the sciences.

I was an atheist until my late twenties and used to attack theists as you're trying to do (but you're not very good at it).

Sorry about the times in your madrassah when you were abused by your prayer leader. You have a debilitating case of "madrassah syndrome,".

I do have Madras syndrome that's true, I absolutely love Indian food

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Hollie

 

[scruffy]

lmao

More completely ignorant assertions about God.

So foolish as to be entirely laughable.

Anyone who thinks they understand God is dumb as a stump.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Hollie

View attachment 1056035

Irrelevant. Nobody is impressed, nor would this exaggerated chest thumping have any bearing on your knowledge or opinions of a topic you clearly know very little about.

 

[Hollie]

Hollie

View attachment 1056035

Oh, dear. The hyper-religious whack job is on a cut and paste Jihad.


Just be honest. You take out the trash at your madrassah.

 

[Hollie]

No, we're not because we know that God created everything and so there's not much more to say about that.

You have no idea how the universe came to exist, none, not a clue. You must believe in magic, the magical ability for laws to just "pop" into existence uncaused, that's how deluded atheists are. Science is based on cause and effect so what caused the first cause?

You are stuck, and as I pointed out already you are happy to lie to yourself and pretend a paradox is not a paradox, this is the level of intellectual rigor I've come to expect from a largely uneducated country that voted for Trump. You too are unschooled, perhaps you were home schooled by those doting parents that spoiled you when you were a kid.

How nice that you claim to know your Gods created everything. You obviously don't know that so let's not pretend you're doing that anything but bloviating.

It's something of a paradox to claim to know your gods created everything when you obviously can't provide any evidence that your gods exist or have ever existed. There is a paradox in that without any evidence for the existence of your gods its laughable to represent you can know your gods are everything creators.

Have you ever presented that paradox to the prayer leader at your madrassah?

 

[scruffy]

Irrelevant. Nobody is impressed, nor would this exaggerated chest thumping have any bearing on your knowledge or opinions of a topic you clearly know very little about.

Random walks coupled with combinatorial explosion are some of the most powerful forces in the universe.

Either by itself is not very impressive, but when combined the power is formidable.

Few people know, that it is basically impossible for a digital computer to create a random number. There is no "algorithm" for randomness. For that you need a physical device. More specifically, a quantum device. Ultimately all randomness boils down to quantum behavior. Thus the randomness is part and parcel of the universe. Our universe wouldn't function "at all" without it.

I get a special kick out of the people who deny the power of randomness. Some claim to understand physics but can't wrap their minds around the Feynman integral, which requires ALL possible paths. The randomness of the universe is comprehensive.

A real mind blower is the Poincare recurrence theorem. Which states that dynamic systems eventually return to any arbitrary state. The thing is, the second recurrence is not necessarily a multiple of the first. You can have a "recurrence series" where each term is different. And yet, all such series contain no more information than the unit interval, a fact proven by Georg Cantor.

The entire mystery of the universe is in the interval [0,1]. Repeat it, and you get the real number line combinatorially, without the need for any special math.

 

[Hollie]

God is not subject to laws, God created laws laws did not create anything nor can they.

The presence of the universe is evidence of God, what else could it possibly be evidence of?

Religions are products of the human mind, God is not religious nor am I.

I was an atheist until my late twenties and used to attack theists as you're trying to do (but you're not very good at it).

I do have Madras syndrome that's true, I absolutely love Indian food

View attachment 1056033

"God is not subject to laws, God created laws laws did not create anything nor can they."

I needed to append "...because I say so" to your nonsense claim.

As you can't offer even the most basic elements of proofs for your gods, it's pointless for you to assign them tasks such as "laws laws'' building.

 

[toobfreak]

In this thread, an interview that Piers Morgan had with Dr. Stephen Meyer, about the actual science behind Charles Darwin’s theory (spoiler: there is none)

TWO THINGS:

1. Science (evolution) and God (religion) are NOT mutually exclusive. You can have both; both can be true.
2. While Darwin was a rich academician, a scholar, a theorist, his theories behind evolution were indeed PROVEN by the field work of Alfred Wallace.

Alfred Russel Wallace - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Malay Archipelago - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Wallace Line - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Hollie]

God is not subject to laws, God created laws laws did not create anything nor can they.

The presence of the universe is evidence of God, what else could it possibly be evidence of?

Religions are products of the human mind, God is not religious nor am I.

I was an atheist until my late twenties and used to attack theists as you're trying to do (but you're not very good at it).

I do have Madras syndrome that's true, I absolutely love Indian food

View attachment 1056033

"The presence of the universe is evidence of God, what else could it possibly be evidence of?"

Another of the nonsensical "because I say'' admonitions of the religious extremist. You mindlessly store a variation of the 'watchmaker' analogy. Did you steal that from your Harun Yahya madrassah?

 

[toobfreak]

God is not subject to laws, God created laws laws did not create anything nor can they.

Far be it from me to defend you, but this is actually true. God is not subject to laws because God is the original cause of all laws making him beyond all laws. Laws limit us and God is without limit.

The presence of the universe is evidence of God, what else could it possibly be evidence of?

Again, this is true. God is self-evident by the universe alone, however, not all have the eyes to see and understand what they are seeing.

Religions are products of the human mind, God is not religious nor am I.

Half true. Religion is partly a product of man's attempts to understand and explain the universe he sees, however, God is the creator of mind from which religion springs, thus, God gives us religion to help us understand him. The important point to understand is that just because some religious views are superseded or invalid does not invalidate ALL religion, because ultimately, God created religion, and one might even say that religion is God.

 

[alang1216]

No, we're not because we know that God created everything and so there's not much more to say about that.

Except that we have no idea what God is or how God created everything.

You have no idea how the universe came to exist, none, not a clue. You must believe in magic, the magical ability for laws to just "pop" into existence uncaused, that's how deluded atheists are. Science is based on cause and effect so what caused the first cause?

Isn't that exactly what creationists believe? The only difference is they believe the cause of the magic was a theoretical 'God' not natural forces.

You are stuck, and as I pointed out already you are happy to lie to yourself and pretend a paradox is not a paradox, this is the level of intellectual rigor I've come to expect from a largely uneducated country that voted for Trump.

One might say the same of you.

 

[toobfreak]

Except that we have no idea what God is or how God created everything.

We have a good idea what God is through God himself, but we can never know how God created everything without having the unlimited understanding which only God has.

The only difference is they believe the cause of the magic was a theoretical 'God' not natural forces.

But God is both a natural force and the creator of all natural forces, so when you defend natural force of science, you are inadvertently still defending God.

The only problem with religion is that religion is so imperfectly taught and understood these days.

 

[alang1216]

We have a good idea what God is through God himself, but we can never know how God created everything without having the unlimited understanding which only God has.

That is faith, not science. You assume much about God but have no evidence for Him outside of your scripture. We know how stars are born and how rain happens. Why do you presume we will never know how the universe came to be or what preceded it?

But God is both a natural force and the creator of all natural forces, so when you defend natural force of science, you are inadvertently still defending God.

Again, faith not science backed by evidence.

The only problem with religion is that religion is so imperfectly taught and understood these days.

If religion is flawed why do you claim "We have a good idea what God is through God himself"? It is religion that supplies your information, isn't it?

 

[Hollie]

We have a good idea what God is through God himself, but we can never know how God created everything without having the unlimited understanding which only God has.


But God is both a natural force and the creator of all natural forces, so when you defend natural force of science, you are inadvertently still defending God.

The only problem with religion is that religion is so imperfectly taught and understood these days.

There really isn't anything natural about appeals to supernatural agents.

What reason can you present to claim that god (define which god(s), is / are the creator of all natural forces. Wouldn't supernatural gods supernaturally create supernatural forces?

 

[toobfreak]

That is faith, not science.

That is your conjecture, not fact.

You assume much about God but have no evidence for Him outside of your scripture.

You would be drawing a bad conclusion there. And I don't have any scriptures. You assume badly again.

We know how stars are born and how rain happens. Why do you presume we will never know how the universe came to be or what preceded it?

Look, I came within an inch of being an astronomer so don't lecture me on stars or stellar creation. It does not sound like you have a very firm grasp on the physics of the early universe as far back as we can explain with science, but the unequivocal fact is that as science progresses, it is actually moving closer to agreeing with and vindicating the existence of God. You see, it is naive to think God is about magic and that science is about fact, or that God exists merely as a tool to explain those things we otherwise have no explanation for.

If religion is flawed why do you claim "We have a good idea what God is through God himself"? It is religion that supplies your information, isn't it?

No. You do not understand. Not all religion is flawed, I was speaking of ancient religions of early man. I remember as a child seeing an early concept of the universe being the Earth as a flat disc supported on the backs of four elephants. Then there were the superstitions about the stars such as the planets being Gods, etc.

Just because some religions/superstitions were flawed does not invalidate all religion/spirituality.

 

[Hollie]

We have a good idea what God is through God himself, but we can never know how God created everything without having the unlimited understanding which only God has.


But God is both a natural force and the creator of all natural forces, so when you defend natural force of science, you are inadvertently still defending God.

The only problem with religion is that religion is so imperfectly taught and understood these days.

"The only problem with religion is that religion is so imperfectly taught and understood these days."

''true Scotsman'', eh?