Total Posts:82|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Evolution is a scandal.

GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 7:38:20 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Could evolution create a unicorn? According to evolution, yes. It goes for goblins, trolls, pixies, minotaurs, cyclops, faires, dragons and even the famous Medusa, a snake lady who has snakes for hair and about another 5000 more here: http://en.wikipedia.org...

So do you believe there is other life out in the universe? According to evolution, the chances are that there most certainly is. So maybe there is a unicorn out there, even though you don't have to see one to know there is one, you can just say, "Yes there might be one out there, which is, has or will live, in the present, past or future." Why can't evolution produce a unicorn? There is no reason it could not. Although it is like saying, "I know the precise numbers of the lottery, and then you get the numbers correct." So the chances are the you will bumb into a unicorn is very, very slim, not necessarily meaning that a unicorn to exist is slim at all. But you meeting one.

According to evolution there is life out side of our planet or soloar system. That is like saying, "Someone will win the lottery, but who, that is another matter." The numbers of the lottery represent a particular mythical creature, for example the numbers 2 4 9 13 27 1 = a fairy. A different type of fairy may = 2 4 9 13 26 1?

But there is a mythical creature out there, as there very well maybe, you can never know unless you see one. By not seeing one does not prove that a certain mythical creature does not exist.

So why do you compare mythical creatures which God? There is no such a thing as an athiest.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 8:05:59 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 7:38:20 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution create a unicorn? According to evolution, yes. It goes for goblins, trolls, pixies, minotaurs, cyclops, faires, dragons and even the famous Medusa, a snake lady who has snakes for hair and about another 5000 more here: http://en.wikipedia.org...
Completely ignoring for the moment the fact that evolution by definition cannot create anything, why yes, evolution can create any of those.

Well, maybe not some dragons; physics denies the possibility of living things beyond a certain size/weight if they don't stay in water. Bone density and muscle strength can only go so far. The same problem applies to anything else with a large structure, regardless of whether it's living or not.

Medusa probably wouldn't work too well either, unless some supernatural stuff is involved, I don't think a living being could turn another living being from a carbon-based object into iron or silicon based object just by pointing two eyeballs at them.

The other ones are pretty vague, but sure, I don't see why they can't.

So do you believe there is other life out in the universe?
Not particularly. As in, I don't believe thee is and I don't believe there isn't.

According to evolution, the chances are that there most certainly is. So maybe there is a unicorn out there, even though you don't have to see one to know there is one, you can just say, "Yes there might be one out there, which is, has or will live, in the present, past or future."
Kinda on the same line of thought as my previous comment: nobody really goes around saying that to themselves about unicorns, dragons, or fairies. The statement is true, yes, there might be one. But why the hell should I believe it?

Why can't evolution produce a unicorn? There is no reason it could not. Although it is like saying, "I know the precise numbers of the lottery, and then you get the numbers correct." So the chances are the you will bumb into a unicorn is very, very slim, not necessarily meaning that a unicorn to exist is slim at all. But you meeting one.
What?

According to evolution there is life out side of our planet or soloar system.
Bull f*cking sh*t liar. I thought you were interpretting this the whole time as something you plugged into the theory of evolution to see what it would churn out. You're just projecting now.

That is like saying, "Someone will win the lottery, but who, that is another matter." The numbers of the lottery represent a particular mythical creature, for example the numbers 2 4 9 13 27 1 = a fairy. A different type of fairy may = 2 4 9 13 26 1?
So many undefined terms here.

But there is a mythical creature out there, as there very well maybe, you can never know unless you see one. By not seeing one does not prove that a certain mythical creature does not exist.
Argument from Silence fallacy.

So why do you compare mythical creatures which God? There is no such a thing as an athiest.
Why yes, you're right. Why the hell DO I compare mythical creatures with God? They're in COMPLETELY different categories. Well if we're going to nitpick, God himself is a mythical creature by definition, but hey, you're right! God cannot ever exist, but unicorns might! Why am I comparing apples to oranges?

Thanks, GodSands :)
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 8:12:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
can evolution create angels.

NO, because they're supernatural and aren't bound by physical laws/ not part of phys reality

And they're just as silly as leprechauns
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 8:27:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Completely ignoring for the moment the fact that evolution by definition cannot create anything, why yes, evolution can create any of those.

Why is there the elephant, the cow, the snake, the whale, the mouse, the comdo dragon? For these animals have no reason not to be mythical, it is just that we have seem them that makes them not to be mythical.

: Well, maybe not some dragons; physics denies the possibility of living things beyond a certain size/weight if they don't stay in water. Bone density and muscle strength can only go so far. The same problem applies to anything else with a large structure, regardless of whether it's living or not.

Unicorn is a horse with a horn between it's eyes. A fairy that is not larger than a dragon fly, the weight is the same, etc.. it just looks like a fairy. No one has said, "This mythical creature has the bone density of a human."

: Medusa probably wouldn't work too well either, unless some supernatural stuff is involved, I don't think a living being could turn another living being from a carbon-based object into iron or silicon based object just by pointing two eyeballs at them.

There is a frog which keep it's young in its skin. Sorry? An ant if the size of a human could lift a house. Sorry?

The other ones are pretty vague, but sure, I don't see why they can't.

: : So do you believe there is other life out in the universe?
Not particularly. As in, I don't believe thee is and I don't believe there isn't.

According to evolution, the chances are that there most certainly is. So maybe there is a unicorn out there, even though you don't have to see one to know there is one, you can just say, "Yes there might be one out there, which is, has or will live, in the present, past or future."
Kinda on the same line of thought as my previous comment: nobody really goes around saying that to themselves about unicorns, dragons, or fairies. The statement is true, yes, there might be one. But why the hell should I believe it?


Why shouldn't you? The thing is that evolution gives the possiblity of one existing in the future or present or one which has existed in the past.

What?

Makes perfect sense. The lottery = life in otter space, the particular numbers of the lottery = a particular type of creature. Including mythical creatures.

According to evolution there is life out side of our planet or soloar system.
Bull f*cking sh*t liar. I thought you were interpretting this the whole time as something you plugged into the theory of evolution to see what it would churn out. You're just projecting now.

That is like saying, "Someone will win the lottery, but who, that is another matter." The numbers of the lottery represent a particular mythical creature, for example the numbers 2 4 9 13 27 1 = a fairy. A different type of fairy may = 2 4 9 13 26 1?
So many undefined terms here.

: : But there is a mythical creature out there, as there very well maybe, you can never know unless you see one. By not seeing one does not prove that a certain mythical creature does not exist.
Argument from Silence fallacy.

No, I am not leading off to another point but completing my point, thank you very much. Just because you have not seen a unicorn does not mean they do not exist.

So why do you compare mythical creatures which God? There is no such a thing as an athiest.
Why yes, you're right. Why the hell DO I compare mythical creatures with God? They're in COMPLETELY different categories. Well if we're going to nitpick, God himself is a mythical creature by definition, but hey, you're right! God cannot ever exist, but unicorns might! Why am I comparing apples to oranges?

You compare a mythical creature typically a unicorn to God existing because you don't believe in unicorns so you argue why should I believe in God, but I say, evolution might have already created a unicorn according to evolution there is no reason who a unicorn could not exist. And evolution does not care about anything, evolution wouldn't say, "Let not create a unicorn." If a unicorn evolves in does, and you would then, if found one, would swollow your own words, by saying there is no God and no unicorn. But God has not created a unicorn, because there is no evidence for them of earth and according to the Bible there is only life of earth and all the stars were created for man to splender at the Glory of God. To say, "How incredible is our God." If God created other planets then God isn't showing off His Glory to anyone. But in stead of love God created a universe for an experiment.

Thanks, GodSands :)

Ha, not need to get angry.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 8:29:34 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 8:12:22 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
can evolution create angels.

NO, because they're supernatural and aren't bound by physical laws/ not part of phys reality

And they're just as silly as leprechauns


Angels were created by God, their not seen as mythical creatures but spirital creatures. You wouldn't believe in them, but if you compare a unicorn to God, you may as well.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 8:37:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 8:29:34 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 12/12/2009 8:12:22 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
can evolution create angels.

NO, because they're supernatural and aren't bound by physical laws/ not part of phys reality

And they're just as silly as leprechauns


Angels were created by God, their not seen as mythical creatures but spirital creatures. You wouldn't believe in them, but if you compare a unicorn to God, you may as well.

Why is god and his angels more than mythical creatures.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 8:45:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 8:37:24 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/12/2009 8:29:34 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 12/12/2009 8:12:22 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
can evolution create angels.

NO, because they're supernatural and aren't bound by physical laws/ not part of phys reality

And they're just as silly as leprechauns


Angels were created by God, their not seen as mythical creatures but spirital creatures. You wouldn't believe in them, but if you compare a unicorn to God, you may as well.

Why is god and his angels more than mythical creatures.


God isn't a creature, and therefore not a mythical creature. But a spirit, God created angels. Angels are also spiritual, angels alone which were not created by God who gives order to the angels for they can sin, but if so as they have the perfect choice to sin, they would go straight to hell. We as humans don't ever have a perfect choice because our spirit is dead without Christ, but we do continue to sin even if we have Christ because we still live with sin but not for sin but for Christ.

Angels aren't mythical, unlike a unicorn you would see one if it was to stand next to you. Angels can move faster than light, they can form any shape, and they can walk through physical things. A unicorn cannot do that.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 8:49:32 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 7:38:20 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution create a unicorn? According to evolution, yes.

Wrong.

This thread is over.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 8:59:12 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 8:49:32 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 7:38:20 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution create a unicorn? According to evolution, yes.

Wrong.

This thread is over.


Could evolution produce something close to a unicorn? A horse, could evolution produce a horn between the eyes of a horse? Yes. Could a horse evolve sharp teeth? Yes according to evolution. Pity that the horse with sharp teeth isn't a mythical creature, but now I have made it one. Sharp teeth as in, meat eating teeth.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:00:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Wow... I read that thinking, 'hey this guy is making an intelligent and funny point'. Then I got to the non-sequiter brain fart of a punchline.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:17:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 8:59:12 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution produce something close to a unicorn? A horse, could evolution produce a horn between the eyes of a horse? Yes. Could a horse evolve sharp teeth? Yes according to evolution. Pity that the horse with sharp teeth isn't a mythical creature, but now I have made it one. Sharp teeth as in, meat eating teeth.

Also wrong. Horses cannot evolve anything. I don't know where you got this idea, but the idea is wrong. If you want me to explain, do it over PM, but this is just nonsense.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:20:32 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 9:17:23 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 8:59:12 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution produce something close to a unicorn? A horse, could evolution produce a horn between the eyes of a horse? Yes. Could a horse evolve sharp teeth? Yes according to evolution. Pity that the horse with sharp teeth isn't a mythical creature, but now I have made it one. Sharp teeth as in, meat eating teeth.

Also wrong. Horses cannot evolve anything. I don't know where you got this idea, but the idea is wrong. If you want me to explain, do it over PM, but this is just nonsense.


So horses don't evolve now? So they will be hoe they are now, forever? I thought evolution has no goals. No I think we are fine right here.
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:26:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 8:06:44 AM, GodSands wrote:
"If there is any creature which is mythical, it's an atheist." One of my favorite quotes.

What a dumb quote - you really believe there are no legitimate atheists in the world? Foolish.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:38:32 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 9:26:35 AM, TheSkeptic wrote:
At 12/12/2009 8:06:44 AM, GodSands wrote:
"If there is any creature which is mythical, it's an atheist." One of my favorite quotes.

What a dumb quote - you really believe there are no legitimate atheists in the world? Foolish.


They might believe they are atheists but they really arn't, otherwise they wouldn't believe that slim chance of them thinking God exists, just like the unicorn just might exist or has existed or will exist at some point past, present or future. Since you atheists do tent to compare unicorns to God.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:40:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 9:17:23 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 8:59:12 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution produce something close to a unicorn? A horse, could evolution produce a horn between the eyes of a horse? Yes. Could a horse evolve sharp teeth? Yes according to evolution. Pity that the horse with sharp teeth isn't a mythical creature, but now I have made it one. Sharp teeth as in, meat eating teeth.

Also wrong. Horses cannot evolve anything. I don't know where you got this idea, but the idea is wrong. If you want me to explain, do it over PM, but this is just nonsense.

Oh come the guy is a complete idiot so give him a break, a lot of people struggle to use the correct English with regards evolution. even some scientists talk like that.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:44:13 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 9:20:32 AM, GodSands wrote:
So horses don't evolve now? So they will be hoe they are now, forever? I thought evolution has no goals. No I think we are fine right here.

Horses evolve, they will not be like they are forever. It's just that your thinking is based on assumptions that aren't correct and to have to explain to you WHY you are 100% wrong, would require me to teach you things.

You are incapable of learning, therefore, you are just a waste of my time.

In other words, you know so little, that even if I tried to explain to you why you are 100% wrong, you wouldn't be able to understand me.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:45:54 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 9:40:22 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 12/12/2009 9:17:23 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 8:59:12 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution produce something close to a unicorn? A horse, could evolution produce a horn between the eyes of a horse? Yes. Could a horse evolve sharp teeth? Yes according to evolution. Pity that the horse with sharp teeth isn't a mythical creature, but now I have made it one. Sharp teeth as in, meat eating teeth.

Also wrong. Horses cannot evolve anything. I don't know where you got this idea, but the idea is wrong. If you want me to explain, do it over PM, but this is just nonsense.

Oh come the guy is a complete idiot so give him a break, a lot of people struggle to use the correct English with regards evolution. even some scientists talk like that.


What about Halo, the game, the enermies from that might be real? Why not, evolution has no goals.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:49:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 9:45:54 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 12/12/2009 9:40:22 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 12/12/2009 9:17:23 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 8:59:12 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution produce something close to a unicorn? A horse, could evolution produce a horn between the eyes of a horse? Yes. Could a horse evolve sharp teeth? Yes according to evolution. Pity that the horse with sharp teeth isn't a mythical creature, but now I have made it one. Sharp teeth as in, meat eating teeth.

Also wrong. Horses cannot evolve anything. I don't know where you got this idea, but the idea is wrong. If you want me to explain, do it over PM, but this is just nonsense.

Oh come the guy is a complete idiot so give him a break, a lot of people struggle to use the correct English with regards evolution. even some scientists talk like that.


What about Halo, the game, the enermies from that might be real? Why not, evolution has no goals.

I am not familiar with Halo, but given the likelihood of life on other worlds then yes it will likely take different forms. Do you have any comprehension whatsoever of the vast diversity of life on earth at the moment. Even at this point in time it is staggering, if you include the past then it is mindblowing.

To somehow claim that this invalidates atheism is just foolish, your argument as usual is non-existent.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 9:58:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 9:44:13 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 9:20:32 AM, GodSands wrote:
So horses don't evolve now? So they will be hoe they are now, forever? I thought evolution has no goals. No I think we are fine right here.

Horses evolve, they will not be like they are forever. It's just that your thinking is based on assumptions that aren't correct and to have to explain to you WHY you are 100% wrong, would require me to teach you things.

You are incapable of learning, therefore, you are just a waste of my time.

In other words, you know so little, that even if I tried to explain to you why you are 100% wrong, you wouldn't be able to understand me.


Neat excuse there.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 10:01:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 9:49:40 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 12/12/2009 9:45:54 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 12/12/2009 9:40:22 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 12/12/2009 9:17:23 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 8:59:12 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution produce something close to a unicorn? A horse, could evolution produce a horn between the eyes of a horse? Yes. Could a horse evolve sharp teeth? Yes according to evolution. Pity that the horse with sharp teeth isn't a mythical creature, but now I have made it one. Sharp teeth as in, meat eating teeth.

Also wrong. Horses cannot evolve anything. I don't know where you got this idea, but the idea is wrong. If you want me to explain, do it over PM, but this is just nonsense.

Oh come the guy is a complete idiot so give him a break, a lot of people struggle to use the correct English with regards evolution. even some scientists talk like that.


What about Halo, the game, the enermies from that might be real? Why not, evolution has no goals.

I am not familiar with Halo, but given the likelihood of life on other worlds then yes it will likely take different forms. Do you have any comprehension whatsoever of the vast diversity of life on earth at the moment. Even at this point in time it is staggering, if you include the past then it is mindblowing.

To somehow claim that this invalidates atheism is just foolish, your argument as usual is non-existent.


The Halo characters are unrealistic on earth because there is no proof of them on earth, but evolution says that it is not realistic that there is Halo enermies on other planets.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 10:06:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 10:01:33 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 12/12/2009 9:49:40 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 12/12/2009 9:45:54 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 12/12/2009 9:40:22 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 12/12/2009 9:17:23 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 8:59:12 AM, GodSands wrote:
Could evolution produce something close to a unicorn? A horse, could evolution produce a horn between the eyes of a horse? Yes. Could a horse evolve sharp teeth? Yes according to evolution. Pity that the horse with sharp teeth isn't a mythical creature, but now I have made it one. Sharp teeth as in, meat eating teeth.

Also wrong. Horses cannot evolve anything. I don't know where you got this idea, but the idea is wrong. If you want me to explain, do it over PM, but this is just nonsense.

Oh come the guy is a complete idiot so give him a break, a lot of people struggle to use the correct English with regards evolution. even some scientists talk like that.


What about Halo, the game, the enermies from that might be real? Why not, evolution has no goals.

I am not familiar with Halo, but given the likelihood of life on other worlds then yes it will likely take different forms. Do you have any comprehension whatsoever of the vast diversity of life on earth at the moment. Even at this point in time it is staggering, if you include the past then it is mindblowing.

To somehow claim that this invalidates atheism is just foolish, your argument as usual is non-existent.


The Halo characters are unrealistic on earth because there is no proof of them on earth, but evolution says that it is not realistic that there is Halo enermies on other planets.



Evolution means that different creatures will have 'appeared' in different enviroments and will therefore take different forms. It is not a certainty that the Halo creatures or anything like that has formed, it is likely that the universe contains a multitude of lifeforms. What is your point?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 10:49:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 9:58:16 AM, GodSands wrote:
Neat excuse there.

I don't think a single person on this forum who has dealt with you would disagree with me. You should know based on all the discussions that we have had that you simply lack too much education in order to adequately have discussions with other people regarding Evolution.

You are NOT QUALIFIED.

GodSands, you have a niche on DDO. You could be very useful in theological debates, in debating Scripture and Christian History. Why are you wasting yourself and wasting our time talking about something you know almost nothing about?

I know that Evolution is important to you, but seriously, give up. I'm not saying that Evolution is right and you are wrong, but you just don't have the tools to handle the job.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 4:43:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 10:49:18 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 12/12/2009 9:58:16 AM, GodSands wrote:
Neat excuse there.

I don't think a single person on this forum who has dealt with you would disagree with me. You should know based on all the discussions that we have had that you simply lack too much education in order to adequately have discussions with other people regarding Evolution.

You are NOT QUALIFIED.

GodSands, you have a niche on DDO. You could be very useful in theological debates, in debating Scripture and Christian History. Why are you wasting yourself and wasting our time talking about something you know almost nothing about?

I know that Evolution is important to you, but seriously, give up. I'm not saying that Evolution is right and you are wrong, but you just don't have the tools to handle the job.


Why have you not given me a reason that I am wrong on this point? Thank you for being humble, but surely evolution could create/evolve a unicorn or any other mythical beast past/present/future anywhere in the universe. It is unrealistic to say unicorns exist on earth because there is no proof of them being on earth, but you cannot say it is unrealistic that unicorns do not exist on another planet in the past, present or in the future.

So why do you compare a unicorn to the existence of God? And any beast which does not exist or has no proof for or aganist it's existence is a mythical creature, just not as well known as fairies, goblins and hobbits for example.

If you deny the existence of a unicorn, you are doubting evolution for the pure purpose of evolution is that there is life and the best lives. So by you doubting the existence of a unicorn you doubt evolution, for in reality you have only used empiricalism to find truth, not reason. Because why isn't a elephant a mythical creature? Because you have seen it, why isn't a troll a mythical creature? Because you haven't seen one? And because of this, you say one does not exist. You use pure empiricalims to find the truth. Not reason, of course a empiricalist can say that fossils were once alive, since living being have skeletons and you can see a fossilised skeleton.

You don't make much sense. For the Bible warns about fables being told true, deceptions and lies such as the existences of a unicorn, the classical fairy tale unicorn. You cannot prove that it does not exist, yet you believe life on other planets exist, whats says there none of them are mythical being? Nothing, you are reasonably allowed to say mythical creatures exist on other planets. It uses the same logic as believing there is life of other planets.

God is not a creature, so why compare a creature to God? Creature means created from nothing, God was not created or made. If you ever come aross a unicorn, which is very, very unlikely, then God exists, according to your logic. If you never come across a unicorn which is very, very likely, then God does not exist according to your logic. No, more so, if no one ever comes across any mythical creature future, past or present God exists and evolution is probably false, but if someone comes across a unicorn anywhere in the universe at any time in existence God probably does not exist and evoltion is most likely correct to the mark.

Yet no satalite has picked up any otter life forms over millions and millions of light years, nothing.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 5:08:02 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Godsands, your problem is you don't understand evolution.

Creatures evolve due to changes in their environment. Not all creatures evolve. Some die out because they can't adapt to their changing environment. This is natural selection. To most fit survive to live on.

Now, these changes don't happen immediately. They happen slowly over time. For example, we have evolved from an ape like species, but we still retain an appendix. It hasn't been phased out of our bodies yet, because it has a side-use, but eventually it could be.

Micro evolution is a small change and is usual the one that occurs in response to an environmental change. For example, if rats wee trapped in a room with only hard nuts to eat, the ones able to grow harder sharper teeth would survive.

Macro evolution is not itself a change, but rather a culmination of micro evolutionary changes with transform it into a new species completley.

Now, onto your universe argument.

Evolution doesn't support the notion there is extra terrestrial life. It's supports the notion under the right circumstances life can flourish, but not that it can adapt out of nothing. What can and can't live is bound by the Laws of Physics.

However, let's consider your God in this. Why would he make millions, maybe billions of uninhabited and uninhabitable planets? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 5:37:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 5:08:02 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Godsands, your problem is you don't understand evolution.

Creatures evolve due to changes in their environment. Not all creatures evolve. Some die out because they can't adapt to their changing environment. This is natural selection. To most fit survive to live on.

Now, these changes don't happen immediately. They happen slowly over time. For example, we have evolved from an ape like species, but we still retain an appendix. It hasn't been phased out of our bodies yet, because it has a side-use, but eventually it could be.

Micro evolution is a small change and is usual the one that occurs in response to an environmental change. For example, if rats wee trapped in a room with only hard nuts to eat, the ones able to grow harder sharper teeth would survive.

Macro evolution is not itself a change, but rather a culmination of micro evolutionary changes with transform it into a new species completley.

Now, onto your universe argument.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Putting the above aside. It has little to do with this.

: Evolution doesn't support the notion there is extra terrestrial life. It's supports the notion under the right circumstances life can flourish, but not that it can adapt out of nothing. What can and can't live is bound by the Laws of Physics.

However, let's consider your God in this. Why would he make millions, maybe billions of uninhabited and uninhabitable planets? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.


I will answer your question, but first , why would there be no life on all these billiona and trillions of planets, there must be a unicorn out there somewhere at one time past, present or future of all existence, according to evolution, it makes sense to think that.

And why did God create all the planets and stars if there is no life out there? Or atleast no intelligent life? To show off to us humans, what a power God He is, how much he loves us, even though there is no hard or easy task for God, everything is the same to God, if that were to be pieceing together a puzzle or to create a universe. Same thing to God, so why not just add a couple of planets (make that trillion upon trillions) if it takes no effort why not. And you may ask, "Why does it say God rested on the 7th day, if nothing is hard or easy, everything is the same, as if everything for God is like to breathing for us, why did it say God rested?"

God knows the future and God knew that Adam would fall, this is why when God asked where Adam is in the Garden, God does not ask as if He did not know where Adam was, but He asked Adam where he was, as so, "Adam where are you hiding?" God knows, Adam does not, in the same way if you are not acting your age, someone who knows your age wll say, "How old are you?" So that you would come to terms with reality.

God knows everything including the fall of man and God knew of the coming issue of sin. So because we are fallen into sin, and there is pain and suffering, rest is needed, so God set up a day of rest, God was sympathetic towards us, for God so loved the world. And first, before we loved Him. God said that the 7th day is a Holy day, and you may rest on that day. We are made from the image of God, as in we understand the universe and science and the maths that shape the universe, you use comunication, and we have spirits, God does not sleep but His light is constently flowing, we find it hard to sleep in the light, why would God sleep in Hid own light? As sinners we are not of the image of God, for God made man in the image of God, pure and spotless, not sinful and wicked. But the sinner begins to demilish and become less and less like God, in fact no one who is not in Chirst is close to God, a kind gentle man, who gives to the poor is equally as far from God as a raping child abuser, it is not that the kind and gentle man is equal to the raping child abuser, it is that God is infinity Holy, so even one sin will place you a distance infinitly far from God.
omelet
Posts: 416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 5:53:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/12/2009 5:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
God said that the 7th day is a Holy day, and you may rest on that day.
Actually, if you want to be biblically accurate, he said that you have to rest on that day and he instructed people to stone you to death if you didn't.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 6:00:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 12/12/2009 5:53:41 PM, omelet wrote:
At 12/12/2009 5:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
God said that the 7th day is a Holy day, and you may rest on that day.
Actually, if you want to be biblically accurate, he said that you have to rest on that day and he instructed people to stone you to death if you didn't.


Yeah, your right there, sorry I should have said. God needed to be strict with His people, otherwise they would wonder off and thus Christ would not have been born to bring love and forgiveness by putting aside the Jewish Pharisees, Jesus was crusifed. It was all planned from the start.
omelet
Posts: 416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2009 6:02:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
It's interesting how any discussion with GodSands about evolution, a scientific idea, ends up with him evangelizing about Christianity and its teachings. If he thinks that he has a non-religious reason to reject evolution, he would do a lot better of a job convincing us if he kept his religion out of these discussions.

The sad fact is that his rejection of evolution is based on his acceptance of the bible as scientific fact. In other words, he has absolutely no argument.