Does the Central Limit Theorem prove a Creator/Deity?, page 26

reply to post by John Matrix

---

Did you not understand your own post then? Your still arguing with terminology that has been out of use for a very long time now.

Your sources from what I understand of what they provide, lack any actual substance of argument against the theory. As I haven't had the time to fix my sound problems, I haven't had time to review them. As was already suggested, visit the talkorigins website. You'll learn a lot there, at least I hope you would. If there is anything you still don't understand about why those videos are the purest BS available on this planet, post your questions here.

If you are arguing against Evolutionary Theory using terminology that doesn't describe the theory anymore, then you are not arguing against Evolutionary Theory. It's quiet a simple concept to understand.

A theory will change or be revised as new discoveries are made, this is a given. Just as the water cycle was never understood by the ancient people who prayed to rain gods doesn't detract from the fact that we now understand the water cycle now. It's the same case for Evolutionary Theory, when it was first discovered that a species can adapt and change eventually leading to a new species (which this has been proven BTW, I provided a link earlier for one such species), but over time some terminology used to describe the theory went out of disuse as new discoveries were made. We now have a better understanding of how a species can change and an understanding of why some species don't change. We have even seen changes occur much faster than we thought were possible, meaning an evolutionary change leading to a new species doesn't need to occur over millions of years.

A new species can be anything from two different fishes that can no longer breed with each other due to genetic differences and all the way to two different species that had a common ancestor, but the two species populations split apart at some point leading to different changes within each species. By all means, don't assume that this is an end all explanation, as Evolutionary Theory encompasses a whole lot more than this basic description.

What I find humorous is that you have already claimed to accept evolution and yet you deny it at the same time.

reply to post by sirnex

---

Hi sirnex, hope all is well.

Do you believe in "chance?"

What about "probability?"

OT

(JOKE) Here's a link to my MEDS, I know a distributor if you want some: www.juiceplus.com...

reply to post by OldThinker

---

There is no chance as chance is merely a term indicating extant causes not recognized or perceived.

There is a cause for every effect and an effect for every cause.

I forget which thread and with whom, but it was within these last two weeks. I got into a debate over chance, he eventually stopped replying. I miss him, it was funny with the thing's he brought up that he considered were indications of chance. Should have seen his fan example, classic comedy.

reply to post by OldThinker

---

I've already explained to you what chance is and isn't. Chance is in a way another word for ignorance.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Welfhard]

reply to post by OldThinker

---

It is in plain easy to understand concise English. Which part of the sentence are you having trouble with? Let me know and maybe I can explain it better.

reply to post by sirnex

---

Listen young man, either answer the question or don't...

Stop playing games!!!

woosaaa......

OT

reply to post by OldThinker

---

Who's playing games? I know you can read English as you keep replying to my posts, somewhat in context to what I say.

It's a simple sentence with simple easy to understand words. As I said, let me know where your having trouble in the sentence and I'll try to explain it better.

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by OldThinker

---

There is no chance as chance is merely a term indicating extant causes not recognized or perceived.

There is a cause for every effect and an effect for every cause.

I forget which thread and with whom, but it was within these last two weeks. I got into a debate over chance, he eventually stopped replying. I miss him, it was funny with the thing's he brought up that he considered were indications of chance. Should have seen his fan example, classic comedy.

Perhaps you can write Webster's and Oxford's and fill them in.

There is a "chance" they might listen to your explanation as to why you think there is no "chance."

There is no "chance" of evolution though.

I already demonstrated the 500 year old living fossils that haven't changed shape one bit.....still a fish, a crab, a shrimp, a shark, a jelly-fish, whatever......they are still the same. Darwin himself said his theory would fall if the transition fossils were not found. He thought they should be abundant....and a few hundred million fossils have been found and the word is "Nanna" "Silch" big fat "Zero".

I hear the funeral march being played....and it ain't for the Undertaker on WWE.

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by OldThinker

---

Who's playing games? I know you can read English as you keep replying to my posts, somewhat in context to what I say.

It's a simple sentence with simple easy to understand words. As I said, let me know where your having trouble in the sentence and I'll try to explain it better.

You need to understand this....you need to listen!!!

OT's been debating longer than you have been living....

SOOOOOOOOOO, settle down....and answer the question...your diversions, sarcasm, and avoidance hurts your cause.

My question was an honest, inquisitive and simple thing.

If you don't answer, I'll know you are dancing...

btw, OT clearly knows why you waffle/divert/etc...

I'm waiting...

reply to post by sirnex

---

Are you out there?

Or are you looking for examples of me being a bit sarcastic?

OT

reply to post by John Matrix

---

Darwin himself said his theory would fall if the transition fossils were not found. He thought they should be abundant....and a few hundred million fossils have been found and the word is "Nanna" "Silch" big fat "Zero".

EVERY

SINGLE

FOSSIL

IS

TRANSITIONAL.

There is no getting around that fact. Willful ignorance is no justification for an argument.

Here is the sentence again.

There is no chance as chance is merely a term indicating extant causes not recognized or perceived.

I already demonstrated the 500 year old living fossils that haven't changed shape one bit.....still a fish, a crab, a shrimp, a shark, a jelly-fish, whatever......they are still the same. Darwin himself said his theory would fall if the transition fossils were not found. He thought they should be abundant....and a few hundred million fossils have been found and the word is "Nanna" "Silch" big fat "Zero".

You demonstrated no such thing. There are transition fossils, despite what the creationist garbage wishes to dole out to you. Learn and think for yourself, not substitute.

LINK
LINK

Fish, crabs, shrimps, and sharks of today are different than their ancestors and do show change in the fossil records.

@OT

SOOOOOOOOOO, settle down....and answer the question...your diversions, sarcasm, and avoidance hurts your cause.

You asked a question.

Do you believe in "chance?"

I gave you an answer, twice now. It is of no fault of myself if you can not understand simple concise English. I will state one last time and then drop the matter as you are toying around pretending you can't understand simple English. State where in the sentence you are having trouble with and I will explain it better.

Now how hard can that be?

reply to post by OldThinker

---

Chance is merely a term indicating extant causes not recognized or perceived.

I honestly can not believe I'm falling for this BS ...

There is no such thing as chance because chance is a term used to describe an event in which there is no recognizable or perceived causation.

Is that better or do you require some flipping English lessons?

The reason I get censored is because of BS garbage such as this. People who don't know wtf they are talking about and people who play games rather than argue the points. You are one of those people, and no I wouldn't think what you stated of yourself if I did meet you. If what you show of yourself online is of any indication of who you are offline, I'm scared poop-less that we have laws against eugenics.

reply to post by John Matrix

---

What is now being defined as transitional forms is NOT what Darwin proposed as a transitional form.

Who cares how Darwin described it? He didn't have the extensive and exhaustive amount of knowledge we NOW have, it's beside the point. It's pointless to argue what HE alone thought on evolution just as much as it is pointless to say there are rain gods because it rained when people prayed. It's pure stupidity. Forget about Darwin and focus on Evolutionary Theory as it stands TODAY.

These varieties are evidence for a common designer.
That's what creationists argue folks, but did the evolutionist video about transitional forms tell you that? No....because it makes sense, and they don't want to make creationists look sensible now do they?

Nothing about creationism makes sense. First it postulates the existence of some entity that has never been proven. Secondly it throws out everything we know to be true about chemistry, physics and biology. That is what you are really arguing against, but to successfully do so, you have to argue that all of the advances made are false, that means any technology derived from those science don't exist. I'm sure you can appreciate how ridiculous that is.

Translation: we found all the links and man is not evolving anymore.

I'm not sure when or who made the video or which video posted your referring to, as I said, I can't review any of them right now.

Regardless, I will say the human species is still evolving. Cue shock and awe. Here is one article, but by all means don't allow this one article to be an end all of the learning process. Now you run along and be a good student and learn some more for yourself this time.

LINK

Give me a break, they admit they are variations of the same species, and determine that humans are nothing more than apes.

The correct terminology is Primates. Please make the distinction next time in your arguments. We are part of the primate family.

Do apes have Criminal Laws founded upon the 10 commandments?
Do apes send men to the moon and telescopes into outer-space?
Do apes build LCD and Plasma TV's?
Do apes build buildings, houses, cars, farm machinery?
Do apes grow crops, cure disease, set bones and put limbs in casts, do heart surgery, talk four or five languages fluently, go to school, make nuclear power plants, make computers?

Sometimes I wonder if the Great Apes are more intelligent then humans.

Do apes create systems of control for the minority of elite in ape society?
Do apes rape the land for resources that are not needed for survival?
Do apes cause the extinction of hundreds of species each year?
Do apes create bombs to kill other apes over petty religious BS?
Do apes deforest immense amounts of land to grow crops more for profit than for actually feeding all of ape-dom?
Do apes create contradictory gods and kill other apes who see the idiocy of it all?

[EDIT TO ADD]

Humans are different. From the time humans suddenly popped up in the ancient past, out of seemingly nowhere, they had language, made tools, built dwellings, had knowledge of mathematics, appointed leaders, grew their own food, and where able to dominate all creatures.

Learn your history, this is BS and not true. We didn't pop up suddenly at all. Unless your going to argue that all of archeology is wrong and is the science of the devil.


[edit on 30-9-2009 by sirnex]

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by OldThinker

---

Chance is merely a term indicating extant causes not recognized or perceived.

I honestly can not believe I'm falling for this BS ...

There is no such thing as chance because chance is a term used to describe an event in which there is no recognizable or perceived causation.

Is that better or do you require some flipping English lessons?

The reason I get censored is because of BS garbage such as this. People who don't know wtf they are talking about and people who play games rather than argue the points. You are one of those people, and no I wouldn't think what you stated of yourself if I did meet you. If what you show of yourself online is of any indication of who you are offline, I'm scared poop-less that we have laws against eugenics.

nice re-statement of your original sentence....

pls give up...

"eugenics"? man, that was low/sad/disappointing

OT

PS: You have kids right? And a wife (upstairs)? Please know i am praying for her...really...I just said one now.

oh well, I could go on, but out of "respect and decorum" I won't...

YOU have so much to offer...

YOU have made OT's prayer list...

YOU are more than you know....

OT's prayin with her, that you live up to your potential...

= = = = =

Man we are off topic, sorry!

I'll U2U if i have more....


If you will, can you please offer some insight on my question???? I'll be good, i promise...I am not trying to "get you" friend....


Why don't you both watch... www.youtube.com... especially at 2:50 to 3:30, humbly dare you?

How Are Plants Aware of the World Around Them?
  Posted 2 days ago with 5 member flags

The Genesis Code
  Posted 9 days ago with 4 member flags

Explain Diversity Reloaded
  Posted 10 days ago with 3 member flags

Tree of Life and Tree of Knowledge
  Posted 5 days ago with 3 member flags

The carrot (chicken or egg , vegetable version)
  Posted 4 days ago with 3 member flags

A theory of proof of a God
  Posted 10 days ago with 2 member flags

Eden: The Double Sided Coin
  Posted 4 days ago with 2 member flags

We are all connected with nature and The Universe IMO
  Posted 4 days ago with 2 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: