It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evolution is boring, What does it mean to you ?

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
In my mind, evolution has sort of replaced the 'stations of the cross,' the path of personal, intellectual and spiritual development. I know we aren't supposed to link to other people's words, so I will shortly state that I follow in the psychological tradition of Timothy Leary, Robert Anton Wilson and Terence McKenna, among others in a similar vein.

The way I see it, evolution is a psychological process of development, a useful metaphor to help us 'evolve' into higher consciousness. It is meaningful to a scientific society in ways that the Stations of the Cross cannot be. It provides a blueprint for self-improvement and self-development that Christianity could never offer me, as an agnostic-buddhist sort of vague spiritualist.

I've developed some pretty radical ideas of spiritual and biological evolution that I doubt anybody will find orthodox or even reasonable, and I don't have the energy to go into great detail in this post. My beliefs are all based around the 'myth' of evolution; the simplified, superficial description of biological evolution serves as a metaphor for understanding many processes of growth in my world-view.
edit on 14-12-2010 by SmedleyBurlap because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Secondly, you claimed not to be a science denier, yet you've exhibited a doubt about the soundness of the theory of evolution. I am curious as to how one could hold a seemingly contradictory stance, and what exactly it is about the theory that you would find doubtful.


so I like science... I just do not have to accept evolution as fact.

you see I believe we are special.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Wow, I'm going to have to address three separate posts, none of which actually address anything I actually said in a single post.

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact
 



Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
are you losing my friend ? I like how you address me by name, that show much respect


Definitely not losing. Hell, it seems like you're not even playing the game.
And it's not really respect, it's courtesy.

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact
 



Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
You don't address people's arguments and you don't provide any basis for the claims you're making.


I like stuff that is self-evident... try just for once in this thread not to use links and others logic, afterall alot of it could be wrong.


Nothing in science or philosophy is self-evident. Not a single point you made is self-evident. And the logic wouldn't be wrong, it's a systematic process which is one of the few ways to arrive at actual, definite truth. As for the links, I only use the ones that are based upon evidence. I linked the observed instances of speciation because they're actually based entirely in fact



You know I love star trek mostly TNG/VOY/ENT and as much as the show is driven by science and technology and the episodes dealing with evolution and practically anything still the underlying theme to ever show is Morality.


But science has absolutely nothing to do with morality. Sure, morality comes into play when science is practiced, but it makes absolutely no claim one way or another with regards to morality. There are no moral implications of gravitation or the speed of light, it's just there like everything else in science.



So no I do not hate science, I respect the questions it asks... because I know where these questions came from in the first place. Philosophy has a few millennia on evolution lol and it's not even good philosophy, it just boring as stated.


Evolution is not philosophy it is science dealing with biodiversity. Philosophy doesn't address the questions asked by evolution and evolution doesn't address the questions asked by philosophy. Evolution respects only one phenomenon in nature, biodiversity.

And how is it boring? What's boring about the wonder of all organisms changing constantly? What's boring about the continuing progress of life in the face of adversity?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
so I like science... I just do not have to accept evolution as fact.


Of course you don't have to accept evolution as factual though I couldn't understand why you wouldn't, particularly if you like science. You do understand that a scientific theory is a fact, correct? It is the graduation point of the sciences.


you see I believe we are special.


Certainly so. Almost every animal is "special" in that it has a quality that is unique and/or superlative to the others in its environment. What does that have to do with belief/non-belief in the theory of evolution?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact
 



Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
so I like science... I just do not have to accept evolution as fact.


Ok, you may choose to ignore reality all you want, but it's still fact whether or not you accept it. We've observed it, we've seen the genetic evidence of it, and we've seen the evidence in the fossil record. So how is it that you cannot accept what is so clearly based in reason and evidence?



you see I believe we are special.


We are special, but only in regards to intelligence and environmental adaptability (which is assisted by our intelligence). That's the only thing we really have going for us, the rest is all just stuff we tack on to make ourselves feel more important than we actually are.

That is, unless you actually have a reason for thinking we're special.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


well its because of the scientific fields that these bacteria and viruses have evolved. not by their own, we helped them, so that lil hypothesis is a fail



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by aliengenes
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


well its because of the scientific fields that these bacteria and viruses have evolved. not by their own, we helped them, so that lil hypothesis is a fail


Incorrect. Whether things evolve naturally or through artificial means the theory of evolution still stands. We also helped dogs evolve from wolves. This doesn't invalidate the truth of evolution.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


wolves didnt generate every species of dog on the planet...thats bullcrap and cannot be proven.

where did man evolve from? and wheres the missing link? dont say ape because it cannot be proved



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by aliengenes
 


That's a complete lie. What about the strains that have have been observed to evolve in isolation? There's a reason that bacteria and viruses provide some of the best proof for evolution. They reproduce so quickly so you can get a large number of generations in a short period of time and observe how the cultures have changed. While immunizations and antibiotics have caused changes in different strains, they also naturally evolve and we use what we know of evolution to predict these changes.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I'm confused sir. Although I understand your inquiry. What does evolution mean to you, the evolutionist?
I don't understand your ripping these guys apart when they try to answer your inquiry.
I think they have expressed rather eloquently what it means to them.

And although they have disagreed with your assumptions that it is a religion, boring, and not offering much to humanity, I don't feel they have been rude or bashing about it.

I am a creationist. And I do not buy into evolution whatsoever. I also see much religious fanaticism among those who treat modern science as a belief system, But I don't see that any of these gentleman have been rude or condescending in their answers to you. Or that they have acted fanatically.

I'm just saying cool down. Debate with a level head.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by aliengenes
 


What missing link are you referring to? We have a complete fossil record from Homo homo sapiens back to at least Australopithecus ramidus, which existed 4.4 million years ago.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by aliengenes


wolves didnt generate every species of dog on the planet...thats bullcrap and cannot be proven.


Yes, actually wolves did generate every species of dog on the planet and it has been proven scientifically. Any routine DNA test on any dog species will verify this.


where did man evolve from? and wheres the missing link? dont say ape because it cannot be proved


Man evolved from a common ancestor of the great apes. This has also been proven in a variety of ways, including DNA testing.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Of course you don't have to accept evolution as factual though I couldn't understand why you wouldn't, particularly if you like science.


I accept evolution as a 'part' not the whole... there are so many other fields one could not possibly be versed in all of them, but I do love putting the pieces together.

So whats the big deal then ? evolution does not erase religion in the least and as I have stated in another topic... "Evolution is like trying to sink an air craft carrier with a pebble and a sling-shot"

it's really not that big, the freako's trying to push their religion is worse than some christian at your door that's for sure.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Maybe... wolves evolved... from feral dogs!

WHOOOAHH

I see that this is actually an evolution vs Creationism thread. I am disappoint, I thought this would be fresh. How could I ever think that the ancient debate between Scientologists and Christologians could leave a single corner of the internet alone?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact
 


To me evolution just means the development of man. Past, present and future.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
I accept evolution as a 'part' not the whole... there are so many other fields one could not possibly be versed in all of them, but I do love putting the pieces together.


Well, of course the theory of evolution is not "the whole", any more than the theory of gravity or germ theory. Like any other scientific theory, it pinpoints a specific area of the sciences; in this case, biology.


So whats the big deal then ? evolution does not erase religion in the least and as I have stated in another topic... "Evolution is like trying to sink an air craft carrier with a pebble and a sling-shot"


I don't think the point of the theory of evolution is to nuke religion. It is often perceived as such though because some religions have made claims that the theory of evolution refutes.


it's really not that big, the freako's trying to push their religion is worse than some christian at your door that's for sure.


I'm confused again. Are you saying that the theory of evolution is a religion that people "push" on others? If so, how exactly is this happening?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact
 


It doesn't claim to disprove religion. What it does do however, is disprove the traditional Creationist belief that God created everything in its present form and that nothing has ever gone extinct.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Maybe... wolves evolved... from feral dogs!

WHOOOAHH


Maybe so.

If you had a way to prove such a thing you'd undo a lot of science indicating exactly the opposite and perhaps become a world renowned scientific superstar. I say go for it.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Almost every animal is "special" in that it has a quality that is unique and/or superlative to the others in its environment. What does that have to do with belief/non-belief in the theory of evolution?


do animals invent and experiment ? cept maybe the monkey that we train to do so...

I believe animals are special also, I have been a dog owner all my life... in fact I have never been without a dog.

edit on 12/14/2010 by Cosmic.Artifact because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join