It just doesn't happen

a reply to: toktaylor

That was a good post but where you go'n? You gotta date or sump'n?
Here before you leave do me one favor if you haven't already looked
at this. Please it isn't long at all.



And I only want to point out how this is just another one
of the countless fascinations. That your position calls on
you to deny any intelligence was involved in it being so.

Your position must deny the adventure that the language
of math is communicating here. As I said the denials imposed
on you by your faith render the endless possibilities of mine as
non existent. And that isn't just wrong it's very boring. Our
Heavenly Father is the final frontier. And he is an endless
frontier. Only by obeying him do we gain the possibility of
going where no man has gone before. You scientists can have
your damn chalk board.

a reply to: cooperton


Over 500 peer-reviewed journals in biological evolution and 200,000 research articles will always prove you wrong.
Regardless how many times you choose to repeat your crap, no matter how good it may sound to some one else, no matter what the content, you will always be proved wrong.

You are a liar and a fraud. You belong to cult that stinks of corruption. These are the facts. And they will never go away.

a reply to: Phantom423

No effect at all. I'm beginning to admire your perseverance. lol
Shut up Cars.

originally posted by: toktaylor
There is never a goal, there is only what results, and the result is always extremely improbable at some level

Yes evolution is the extremely less probable option

the argument for Evolution is always more logical

So despite admitting it in the sentence above, you somehow come to this conclusion? That doesn't make sense. Random chance has infinitely low chances of making, for example, a Ford Truck. Yet it has almost a 100% chance of being made and designed by an intelligent force that knows how to make trucks.

Also his creation of life and the universe would be flawless and perfect especially concerning his favorite project, man. Instead what we find in nature is the opposite

We're living in a fallen world. There are answers that begin to bring the bigger picture together without so many holes. The imperfect world is due to people choosing imperfect decisions.

which supports lengthy, evolutionary process

Show me a mechanism how self-awareness and emotions could have evolved.... Just kidding don't waste your time it is mind-bogglingly impossible. The billions of neuronal highways, neurotransmitters, and receptors that would need to all be organized in the correct manner is far beyond the possibility for random chance to create. It would be honestly easier for random chance to create the terminator android... at least he didn't have emotions. Obviously random chance is never going to create artificial intelligence, just like it couldn't have created natural human intelligence.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: cooperton


Over 500 peer-reviewed journals in biological evolution and 200,000 research articles will always prove you wrong.
Regardless how many times you choose to repeat your crap, no matter how good it may sound to some one else, no matter what the content, you will always be proved wrong.

Using popularity as your proof is a fallacy:

"In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: 'If many believe so, it is so'. "

Show me one of those 200,000 research articles that documents a population of organisms evolving. Otherwise admit it is faith-based

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: toktaylor
There is never a goal, there is only what results, and the result is always extremely improbable at some level

Yes evolution is the extremely less probable option

the argument for Evolution is always more logical

So despite admitting it in the sentence above, you somehow come to this conclusion? That doesn't make sense. Random chance has infinitely low chances of making, for example, a Ford Truck. Yet it has almost a 100% chance of being made and designed by an intelligent force that knows how to make trucks.

Also his creation of life and the universe would be flawless and perfect especially concerning his favorite project, man. Instead what we find in nature is the opposite

We're living in a fallen world. There are answers that begin to bring the bigger picture together without so many holes. The imperfect world is due to people choosing imperfect decisions.

which supports lengthy, evolutionary process

Show me a mechanism how self-awareness and emotions could have evolved.... Just kidding don't waste your time it is mind-bogglingly impossible. The billions of neuronal highways, neurotransmitters, and receptors that would need to all be organized in the correct manner is far beyond the possibility for random chance to create. It would be honestly easier for random chance to create the terminator android... at least he didn't have emotions. Obviously random chance is never going to create artificial intelligence, just like it couldn't have created natural human intelligence.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: cooperton


Over 500 peer-reviewed journals in biological evolution and 200,000 research articles will always prove you wrong.
Regardless how many times you choose to repeat your crap, no matter how good it may sound to some one else, no matter what the content, you will always be proved wrong.

Using popularity as your proof is a fallacy:

"In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: 'If many believe so, it is so'. "

Show me one of those 200,000 research articles that documents a population of organisms evolving. Otherwise admit it is faith-based

Fallen world, imperfect decisions, what the heck are you even talking about? What bigger picture are you referring to that disproves evolution and resolves our existential panic?

I understood something thanks to this thread.

1. The question how the universe, life and everything began will forever (or at least until we really really got a working, proven Theory of Everything) remain philosophical.

2. Every dogma about what can empirically not be proven is unscientific.

My personal conclusion is the only way out of this dilemma is to focus on what can be proven, that science still needs a process of emancipation from religious thought.
Only doubt leads to the need of figuring stuff out and by that to progress. In that sense it is true that science is guilty of replacing one false dogma the creation, by another false dogma the BBT.
So this whole argument is pointless.

Embrace doubt.

a reply to: Peeple

So this whole argument is pointless.

Yes it is. And yet both sides of the coin are very fascinating. At least to
me. That's why I don't like to see anyone get up set. It makes me want
to reach out to them and say anything to cause their perspective to
change. My hope is really just to try and make a supreme being a little
more appealing to academics. Simply imagining the adventures such
a relationship might entail. Besides that all I need is for some one to say
something like this

I understood something thanks to this thread.

to make it worth while.

a reply to: carsforkids

A supreme being that is notable by its absence, shines with the virtue of neglecting its creation, incapable of telling anybody on the planet the truth once throughout milennia... that's only appealing to a special few I'm afraid.

...but hey- yeah you're super special after all

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: carsforkids

A supreme being that is notable by its absence, shines with the virtue of neglecting its creation, incapable of telling anybody on the planet the truth once throughout milennia... that's only appealing to a special few I'm afraid.

...but hey- yeah you're super special after all

Exactly No two humans will ever even have an Identical appearance.
The same goes for you my dear. More than you know.

a reply to: carsforkids

Which is what you'd expect if we're all designed by the same intelligence that we would all come in maybe 5 variations but not this endless number of uniqueness.

If you'd be logical for a second...

a reply to: Peeple

It isn't logical to understand the absolute diversity in humans is
an indication of preference more than just happened that way.
I'm being logical you're being unreasonable.

Just an observation, it's really sad that her response to solid arguments are, "you are in a Cult", this labeling is an immediate sign that somebody can no longer articulate a solid argument and must put the person in a negative classification to even try to make their point.

If all you have to stand on is peer reviewed papers that already believe what you do, this is not a way to really learn but traps you in a echo chamber of thought patterns. cooperton always makes good points based on science, but some people keep totally ignoring them.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Absolutely and "Where is logic" as well. Both display a relentless
amount of what it takes carry this argument thru to it's pinnacle.
I don't think I know of any place on the web that I can find a better
case for design then those two.

And I view the case I make as rock solid but it doesn't hold a candle
to theirs. The case they offer completely envelopes mine. And i
feel honored by every post they make. Never intimidated both just
admirable.

Ya Phantom I guess some people don't want to be understood I mean
I feel gave it a pretty good shot. She don't like Coop much does she? lol
And the mods let that fly/ I don't get that but I don't care much either.