Is the theory of evolution responsible for a toxic society?

Originally posted by ConspiracyNutjob

Originally posted by sirhumperdink
reply to post by ConspiracyNutjob

 

deleted my post
im done for tonight.....theres too much stupid in the world for me to remain calm enough to avoid a ban (i cant even begin to describe how depressing it is to read through the countless threads filled with nonsense that have been popping up left and right)

edit on 20-3-2013 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)

This seems to be the typical ending of most conversations I have with evolutionist's (but not all), some of them will have the courtesy of acknowledging that they cannot prove their belief.

"You are dumb because you don't understand evolution, I am smart because I understand evolution".

Next please.

Next one over here:
We have found many examples for evolution-processes, which is the very important distinction from "theory" to "law" in science. A complete proof is not necessary as long as there is no counter-proof. If anyone could proof that the theory of evolution is wrong, really wrong as in "there is no possible way for the next generation of beings to be other/better/worse by genetics than their ancestors", science would have to find another way to describe so many examples of said processes, which were and are observed.

Why do you think that genetic algorithms in FPGAs are working so good (Example? They are working with minor changes for every generation and deletion of the worst results (as in "0 of 100 checks fullfilled").

Give us a counter-proof. That should be far easier, a single example of an animal living now and millions of years ago (think crocodile, shark, etc.) with DISTINCT disadvantages which would usually not leave them the chance to survive - think crocodile as a large aquatic animal... without sharp teeth or strong hide and without hundreds of children so enough could survive. Does this exist? Could this exist?

As long as no possible counter-proof is found, the theory of evolution describes best the ways of nature.

You think it's bad now? Wait until they classify belief in God as a psychological disorder. Don't think that will happen? It will eventually. They classify more and more things as mental disorders.

They'll find a way. Trust me. They'll find a way to argue that belief is bad. Traditionally, we see belief as a way to give broken people hope; a chance to get better. Shelters will often be church's simply because they believe that homeless people will somehow get better if they have a belief in God. Similarly, they let preachers enter prisons to preach the word of God in the hope that he prisoners catch onto it. But all of this is based on present cultural values and assumptions. There's no written rule that demands this must remain true as we learn more. I would not be surprised!

The adage in the past was that perfectionists made good products. They kept people honest. But nowadays it's completely turned on its head. Perfectionists are bad. They're mentally disordered.

Things change. We learn more about our brain. We get more confident about changing people. We start to think that all you gotta do to fix someone is pop em a pill or do some simple surgery.

reply to post by jonnywhite


Been done already. Just because it's not in the DSM doesn't mean it isn't seen as a mental illness.

reply to post by wildtimes

It'll be in the DSM eventually, or in whatever is used by mental health professionals in the future.

They'll point to religious wars and cult suicides and irrational religious beliefs that lead to child abuse or health problems in the believer and so on. There're so many examples of irrational religious behaviors. It won't be hard. Religion is so easy to attack. But it's so common that right now it can't be attacked; it's instead sanctioned. But once non-believers are common, religious faith is doomed. Remember that might makes right oftentimes. If non-believers are greater, they will smash opposition. It's like a paradigm. Right now, religious faith is a pillar of society. But someday it might not be.

reply to post by ConspiracyNutjob


Is it because of the theory of evolution we have a toxic society?

I would say it's because we've been sold another theory for thousands of years, which, in the end, proved to be wrong.

reply to post by ConspiracyNutjob


While a very interesting "opinion and view" you have it falls short to address why you believe we have a "toxic" society.

Only those on agendas (specially religious ones) will believe that teaching certain subjects as "theories" in a curriculum will affect the outcome of peoples way of thinking as they become older.

For the contrary it only adds more variety of the many controversial theories of how we humans came to be, because they are all nothing but theories.

Originally posted by ConspiracyNutjob

1. The universe exploded from nothing into everything.

Thats the Big Bang theory, not evolution theory. They are in fact two seperate theories.

Theistic creation theories also claim that the universe was created from nothingness so there is really no reason that the scientific explanation and the theistic explanation would be mutually exclusive.

2. All biological life on planet earth evolved from a rock (add some rain & sunlight)

This is yet another different theory, called Abiogenesis, ie. the theory that organic matter was formed by inorganic matter through a series of complex chemical reactions. Evolution theory does not go so far as to attempt to explain the origins of life itself.

3. We are here by random chance.

Even the most improbable scenario can become reality given a sufficient amount of time.

4. It is assumed that the universe is billions of years old in order to uphold this theory

It is not "assumed" that the universe is billions of years old...it is inferred from observations of the universe itself. On the other hand some theistic creation theories do assume that the universe must only be ~6000 years old, based on the assumption that their holy book gives an accurate timeline consisting of 1000 year "days" of creation.

I advise that you educate yourself sufficiently before calling foul.

Here we go =P

www.geekosystem.com..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Still evolution, abiogenesis and big bang theories make more sense than a "god made it all" explanation.

Originally posted by ConspiracyNutjob

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
Are you intentionally grossly oversimplifying, embellishing, and misconstruing or is this what you really believe the theory of evolution is all about?

Kirk Cameron lied to you, man. Not a very Christlike thing of him to do. =(

Drilled down to it's simplest form this is absolutely what evolution is all about.

Evolution is about change happening. That things evolve from one thing to another. Evolution is in fact what spiritual people in eastern philosophy think their souls do. Evolve from one thing to another. Evolution is a truth on a grander scale than just the how life was created with help of synchronicity. Societies evolve. Knowledge evolve. Even spiritual knowledge and Religion evolve but we are probably in for an extreme upgrade soon. The only thing I dislike about the theory of evolution that is taught is that they are giving to much room for the survival of the fittest and totally forgetting symbiosis that is needed for all living things to live at all. Without symbiosis everything ceases to be.

Do not really care about the Christian Religion since the bible is a book you need to have an Einstein mind to really understand and master it or get lost in dualistic views.

Originally posted by generik
....
the belief in the theory of evolution or science does not have that set of moral standards at all. so there is nothing to give a base for moral standards. at the same time those that tend to believe in evolution and science in place of religion, also tend to deem all other religious beliefs as untrue. as such canceling out those values taught by religion yet putting nothing in their place.

why is "murder bad" for example? why shouldn't you kill someone who annoys you or is in your way?

i think this is the point the OP is trying to make.

I agree with you, I think this is exactly what the OP was trying to get at before this thread derailed into a argument over whether evolution is real or not.

I think this is a very valid question. Using the Bible as an example and the commandment "thou shalt not murder" (politically correct and more "modern" bibles have been altered to say thou shalt not kill)

This lays down the belief in a society that follows biblical teaching that murdering someone is bad. If you remove the bible and it's teachings what is to say that murder would still be bad? People like my brother who is a hard core athiest always try to argue that soceity would still view murder as wrong, but this society we live in has had it taught from cradle to grave for generations upon generations that God has said murder is a sin. If the Bible had never existed would murder still be believed to be a sin?

Might has always made right in the world. You get the money, you get the power and the followers and you can kill, rape and sacrafice whoever you want. For entertainments sake and to confuse people you can even claim to believe in a religion, any religion, but it doesn't matter because at the end of the day the only person you worship and believe in is yourself.

I personally like to think that most people are inclined to be good and are free to choose to live how they want and to raise their children how they want. Don't want to teach evolution? Cool. Don't want to teach creationism? Also cool. Who cares? Just butt out of other people's personal lives.

History has shown over and over again that the peope that like to "lord it over" other people and control them are the people who also support eugenics style killing of others they don't like and ultimately label as "useless" and wastes of space.

You mean that before Darwin was even born, the strong never crushed the weak ?

No, but...
The theory of evolution certainly helps people justify crushing the weak. The theory of evolution is a Eugenicist's wet dream.

Only to people who do not understand what evolution is and disregard symbiosis especially Mutualism

Mutualism is the case in which both benefit from the relationship. An example of this would be mycorrhizas in which there is a highly interdependent association between soil fungi and plant roots (e.g. orchids). The host plant receives essential minerals from the fungus, which, in turn, obtains the photosynthetically derived chemicals from the plant. It is reported that 95% of flowering plants grow well only with this relationship.

Would it not be better if you in fact learned what evolutionary theory is about and what the science say today so that you can use science against the people who are in fact are simplyfying and lying about what the science say.

And you might wanna look into what synchronicity is also. Do you homework and you might find out a few things that was not included in the bible.

Okay, so let's mix up the Big Bang Theory (origin of our universe), the Abiogenesis theory (origin of life in this planet) and the Theory of Evolution (The progressive adaptation of lifeforms) and end up with something that doesn't make sense!!!

The Theory of Evolution DOES NOT CARE about how life arose. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

reply to post by FaithandArms

This lays down the belief in a society that follows biblical teaching that murdering someone is bad. If you remove the bible and it's teachings what is to say that murder would still be bad? People like my brother who is a hard core athiest always try to argue that soceity would still view murder as wrong, but this society we live in has had it taught from cradle to grave for generations upon generations that God has said murder is a sin. If the Bible had never existed would murder still be believed to be a sin?

Are you saying you need a Bible to stop you from murdering? If the only thing standing between you murdering me is a passage in a book, let's just say I'm glad to not be in your presence.

Society relies on a moral code to function. The authors of the Bible derived their moralities from the society of the time. They didn't create them out of thin air. Look how irrelevant most of the Biblical moralities are. All one has to do is read Plato, Aristotle, Confucius, etc. to know there was morality before the world wide domination of the Abrahamic God.

Look at this commandment:

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

To say this commandment is so ingrained in society is simply untrue. I see it broken often.

We don't kill each other simply because we don't want the same to happen to us, not because we were ordered not to.

The Biblical moralities mean nothing, especially when only a few of them are taken seriously.

Originally posted by luciddream
AHHHHHHHHHHH!! ABIOGENESIS IS NOT EVOLUTION FOR 7 MILLIONTH TIME!!

For evolution to take place, life, a simple life such as bacteria should already be present.

While Abiogensis, still a HYPOTHESIS, discusses the idea of the Origin of Life.

Evolution cannot be observed directly because it will take millions of year, human started collecting information(that is still available now) only about 5,000 yrs ago.

One simple way but not exact is to put pressure on a growing bacteria, to make artificially cause environmental stress, which would force it to adapt different method of surviving, aka adaptation. That would be a miniscule scale of how evolution works, however, that is just the start, this adaptation after a while will start producing offspring that are already fit to the new adaptation(this could also be beneficial random mutation), which would grow up differently, then so onto slowly changing over many many generation.

Dogs and Wolfs are great example. Tho not big difference, Wolves are not Dogs. and Dogs will not survive in the wild, they are adapted to human life. Have you seen cows in the wild?

Bacteria is anything but simple. How did we get this bacteria in the first place?

As already stated I am not against Microevolution, the differences between wolves and dogs can easily be explained through microevolution. It is at the Macroevolution stage that the theory of evolution becomes a fairy tale.

The solution of an evolutionist to fit the theory: Add billions and billions of years and magic happens!

Originally posted by drakus
Okay, so let's mix up the Big Bang Theory (origin of our universe), the Abiogenesis theory (origin of life in this planet) and the Theory of Evolution (The progressive adaptation of lifeforms) and end up with something that doesn't make sense!!!

The Theory of Evolution DOES NOT CARE about how life arose. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

edit on 20/3/2013 by drakus because: (no reason given)

You can make a distinction between cosmic evolution and biological evolution all day every day.

The connection between cosmic evolution and bioloigcal evolution is critical, the whole theory is bunk because it requires abiogenesis to bridge the gap.

We do adapt and evolve but it is limited to MICROEVOLUTION, Macroevolution is a fantasy.

Originally posted by Glass

Originally posted by ConspiracyNutjob

1. The universe exploded from nothing into everything.

Thats the Big Bang theory, not evolution theory. They are in fact two seperate theories.

Theistic creation theories also claim that the universe was created from nothingness so there is really no reason that the scientific explanation and the theistic explanation would be mutually exclusive.

2. All biological life on planet earth evolved from a rock (add some rain & sunlight)

This is yet another different theory, called Abiogenesis, ie. the theory that organic matter was formed by inorganic matter through a series of complex chemical reactions. Evolution theory does not go so far as to attempt to explain the origins of life itself.

3. We are here by random chance.

Even the most improbable scenario can become reality given a sufficient amount of time.

4. It is assumed that the universe is billions of years old in order to uphold this theory

It is not "assumed" that the universe is billions of years old...it is inferred from observations of the universe itself. On the other hand some theistic creation theories do assume that the universe must only be ~6000 years old, based on the assumption that their holy book gives an accurate timeline consisting of 1000 year "days" of creation.

I advise that you educate yourself sufficiently before calling foul.

Forgive me but I like to roll the whole thing into one package to illustrate how ridiculous the big bang theory, the theory of evolution and abiogenesis really is from a scientific point of view.

The assumed age of the universe is not due to observations at all, it is based on the big bang theory and the theory of evolution. Scientist's like to stress that the universe has been here for billions of years because for some reason if you add more time then magic happens!

Abiogenesis can magically happen when you add lot's of zeros for the age of the universe.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by ConspiracyNutjob

 

While a very interesting "opinion and view" you have it falls short to address why you believe we have a "toxic" society.

Only those on agendas (specially religious ones) will believe that teaching certain subjects as "theories" in a curriculum will affect the outcome of peoples way of thinking as they become older.

For the contrary it only adds more variety of the many controversial theories of how we humans came to be, because they are all nothing but theories.

Why do people kill people in the name of God? Are they born to do this or are they influenced by their culture and the people that mould their philosophy?

This also applies to the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution does have an impact on the way someone will live their life, particularly for the true believer. Hitler & Stalin were true believers.

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by ConspiracyNutjob

Originally posted by sirhumperdink
reply to post by ConspiracyNutjob

 

deleted my post
im done for tonight.....theres too much stupid in the world for me to remain calm enough to avoid a ban (i cant even begin to describe how depressing it is to read through the countless threads filled with nonsense that have been popping up left and right)

edit on 20-3-2013 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)

This seems to be the typical ending of most conversations I have with evolutionist's (but not all), some of them will have the courtesy of acknowledging that they cannot prove their belief.

"You are dumb because you don't understand evolution, I am smart because I understand evolution".

Next please.

Next one over here:
We have found many examples for evolution-processes, which is the very important distinction from "theory" to "law" in science. A complete proof is not necessary as long as there is no counter-proof. If anyone could proof that the theory of evolution is wrong, really wrong as in "there is no possible way for the next generation of beings to be other/better/worse by genetics than their ancestors", science would have to find another way to describe so many examples of said processes, which were and are observed.

Why do you think that genetic algorithms in FPGAs are working so good (Example? They are working with minor changes for every generation and deletion of the worst results (as in "0 of 100 checks fullfilled").

Give us a counter-proof. That should be far easier, a single example of an animal living now and millions of years ago (think crocodile, shark, etc.) with DISTINCT disadvantages which would usually not leave them the chance to survive - think crocodile as a large aquatic animal... without sharp teeth or strong hide and without hundreds of children so enough could survive. Does this exist? Could this exist?

As long as no possible counter-proof is found, the theory of evolution describes best the ways of nature.

Once again. Microevolution does happen and can be observed. Macroevolution is a fairy tale and needs to be removed from the textbooks.

Trying to say that the burden of dis-proof is on me is insane.

'Prove to me that a small asteroid with pink polka dots is not floating in orbit around pluto'

You are assuming that we evolved at a macro level because it is the only explanation outside of a creator for our existence. Even then the big bang theory creates a massive problem for you because you still need abiogenesis for the transition of cosmic evolution to biological evolution.

Despite all of the holes in these theories they are often stated as facts or laws as you have just mentioned...

Hitler was a self-proclaimed Christian you may not claim him but it doesn’t matter if you do or not. He was a believer. The Reich had many religious undertones.

Hitler wrote: "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.." As a boy, Hitler attended to the Catholic church and experienced the anti-Semitic attitude of his culture. In his book, Mein Kampf, Hitler reveals himself as a fanatical believer in God and country. This text presents selected quotes from the infamous anti-Semite himself.

www.nobeliefs.com...

Originally posted by Grimpachi
Hitler was a self-proclaimed Christian you may not claim him but it doesn’t matter if you do or not. He was a believer. The Reich had many religious undertones.

Hitler wrote: "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.." As a boy, Hitler attended to the Catholic church and experienced the anti-Semitic attitude of his culture. In his book, Mein Kampf, Hitler reveals himself as a fanatical believer in God and country. This text presents selected quotes from the infamous anti-Semite himself.

www.nobeliefs.com...

edit on 20-3-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

Because he never lied did he?